Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 15 Jul 1948

Vol. 112 No. 3

Committee on Finance. - Vote 31—Fisheries.

Minister for Agriculture (Mr. Dillon)

I move:—

That a sum not exceeding £93,470 be granted to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending the 31st day of March, 1949, for Salaries and Expenses in connection with Sea and Inland Fisheries, including a Grant-in-Aid.

I think it may be best before going into details of this Estimate to say a general word on the broad policy which I conceive it to be the duty of the Department of Fisheries to pursue in this country. I believe the prime function of the Department of Fisheries is to maintain and defend against all interests the livelihood of the inshore fishermen along our coasts. I conceive it to be the duty of my Department to ensure that no vested interest, foreign or domestic, will pursue its own end at the expense of the livelihood of our inshore fishermen. I do not want for a moment to conceal from the House that that aim in certain circumstances imposes at times a modest burden on the consumer of fish; but, if such burden should occur, I am satisfied that a consistent adherence to this policy will tend to reduce it as time goes on. Many interested parties conceive it to be a desirable thing to promote the trawling industry in this country. With my present understanding of this problem, founded on five years' representation of the County of Donegal and an intimate contact with the fishermen of that county during that period and ten years' interest in these problems since, I am satisfied that we must make our choice between establishing a trawling industry in this country and preserving the inshore fishermen—for we cannot have both. If we are to have an efficient trawling company, that trawling company can supply not only the total demand of our domestic market but a very substantial export trade as well; and I am not going to ask the fishermen on our coast to become a charge on public charity.

If there were an efficient trawling company operating in this country there would be no need for the inshore fishermen, and the only basis upon which they could remain in existence would be as a charge on the general community. They are not that kind of men. I do not believe, even if we asked them to accept that status, that they would be prepared to accept it. And even though we were ready to provide money artificially to keep their industry in existence, they just would not accept it; they would turn their hands to other work. Then an industry which constitutes, in my opinion, an essential element in a way of life that I believe it is valuable and desirable to preserve for our people, would be destroyed, and that way of life could no longer continue. Therefore, I am constrained to present all and sundry with notice that, so long as I retain the confidence of this House as the Minister for Fisheries, there will be no trawling company in this country; that is, in the accepted sense of the word, a commercial trawling company with a fleet of deep-sea trawlers.

There is in existence a kind of quasi-trawling company which operates from this city, and this problem arises in connection with that. There are a number of wholesale merchants in the fish business in this country. That trawling company, provided its activities do not go further than they have gone so far, is not inconsistent with the maintenance of a prosperous livelihood for the inshore fishermen, because it is really a kind of a compliment to call it a trawling company. I would be prepared to see such a company continue to function, provided it was not a monopoly in the hands of one fish wholesaler. I am prepared to see it maintained as the co-operative activity of all the recognised fish wholesalers; that is to say, that all would have a share in the enterprise and all would equally share the benefits of the enterprise. I would consider a proposal that it should be run by the Sea Fisheries Association as an ancillary activity to the inshore fishermen's industry, or I would be prepared to see it suspend its operations. But there is one basis upon which I do not think it may be properly continued in being, and that is as a reserve monopoly.

Some Deputies might say: "Why do you want to interfere with them at all?" The only justification I have for suggesting that we should is that if we allow one trawling company in private hands we ought to allow every private individual who wants to start a trawling company to start it. I will not let anyone start a big commercial trawling company based on this country because I believe it would destroy the livelihood of the inshore fishermen and, therefore, without in any way wanting to be draconian or precipitate or dictatorial, I put the circumstances to the House and implicitly to the trawling company concerned, with no desire whatever unduly to interfere with the limitations of the individual interests. It is the policy of the Department to have no trawling company in competition with the inshore fishermen. The position of that company must be altered from a monopolistic one into one in which all those who have an interest in the wholesale fish business would have an equal share, or it must come to an end.

Now, supposing we accept the position that no big trawling company is to provide a surplus of fish, we are then faced with the situation that the inshore fishermen, while they will provide generally an ample supply and variety of fish for our domestic market, will, on occasion, as the result of ungovernable weather, be unable to land fish for a week or maybe a fortnight, and we are confronted with a hiatus which the consumer is entitled to expect will be filled so that he will have a supply of fish when weather makes it impossible for the inshore fishermen to make their regular deliveries. The only workable method I see out of that difficulty is to authorise the Sea Fisheries Association on those rare occasions to go to Grimsby or one of the large centres of fish supply abroad, bring in sufficient fish to fill the hiatus and auction it off amongst all the wholesalers so that all can have an equal share of it for their trade in the knowledge that there will be no intention to maintain that irregular procedure but as a device merely to fill the gap when weather makes it impossible for the inshore fishermen to supply fish.

I am not fanatical on any of the methods I here outline and I am quite open to the suggestion of a better method than the one I am suggesting of achieving the fundamental objective, and that is that this market will be reserved for the inshore fishermen and that no interference, foreign or domestic, will be allowed to override that prime desideratum.

Now I come to the question of inland fisheries and I have an immense amount of technical information here, the broad heads of which I will deal with briefly. Under the 1939 Fishery Act, there was a proviso that at a certain stage the riparian rights to net fresh water rivers would be extinguished by the State on the basis of compensation. Those sections of that Act are now coming into operation and there have been some places where there has been misunderstanding and uneasiness when those who had a right to net those fresh water rivers were told they might no longer do so. Some of them do not realise that if that right is withdrawn from them the Act provides that the value of the right they have been called upon to surrender has to be fixed by an independent arbitrator and that whatever figure he fixes they must receive, and if they are not pleased with his settlement that they should have a right of appeal.

Therefore I would invite Deputies to whom constituents may come in perplexity in that matter to reassure them and advise them, wherever possible, to constitute themselves into a group of riparian owners seeking compensation for their loss of rights under this Act and to retain the service of an independent solicitor to represent them in the arbitration, and from that on the solicitor will take charge of the negotiations for them and they need have no anxiety that substantial and generous justice will not be done to their claim.

There is not the slightest desire on the part of this Government—and I think I can speak with confidence on behalf of the Government responsible for passing the Act, our predecessors —to treat these riparian owners in any niggardly or ungenerous way. It was the purpose of those who drafted the Act, as it is the purpose of this Government, that they should be fairly, or even generously treated. It will be our constant aim to ensure that no person, who has rights under the Act, will leave the arbitration with a legitimate feeling of grievance or hardship.

I know that there will be Deputies here who will have a word to say about the Sea Fisheries Association, and I should like to anticipate these words by recalling to the minds of those who have been interested in this question over a long time, the comparative position of our inshore fishermen to-day with the condition in which they found themselves two or three years after the previous Great War. The inshore fishermen during the 1914-1918 war made a lot of money and they bought boats, they went into debt and they took a very optimistic view of the future. Not many years had passed until practically everyone of them was hopelessly insolvent.

Efforts were made to collect debts from them and their boats were abandoned, valuable gear was thrown away and the whole fishing industry was thrown into a state of confusion, into something approximating to despair. Out of that came the Sea Fisheries Association and a whole new concept of allowing a group of men to get advances for the provision of boats and gear and to permit them to repay out of the proceeds of their several catches, with the result that the majority of the fishermen have come into the post-war period, free of debt, and with equipment mostly in good order, albeit there is a difficulty in procuring the things that require replacing. While I do not suppose that we can ever hope that they will grow immensely rich, most of them are reasonably comfortable and are getting along. There has been a difficulty in getting nets but nets are being procured.

Deputy Flynn will be interested to hear that Kelvin engines were not forgotten when we were in London. We had even the Chancellor of the Exchequer concerned to look for Kelvin engines for us. Negotiations are going on but they are a tough lot, the same bunch, and it is hard to get engines out of them. Danish engines are available but they are expensive and I do not think that people like them. Deputies may rest assured that the Sea Fisheries Association are doing all in their power constantly, not only to get engines for the fishermen but to get the kind of engines that the fishermen want.

As Deputies are aware, in the fish business from the fishermen to the consumer there is a very wide variety, a surprisingly wide variety, of interests of one kind or another and their various claims and imagined rights not infrequently collide, loudly and resoundingly. Amongst them all, so far as my study of the problem goes, there is one body which is primarily, and as far as I can find out, solely and exclusively concerned with the welfare of the fishermen and that is the Sea Fisheries Association. Therefore, I need hardly tell the House, there is one subject on which all the other interests are loudly and resolutely unanimous and that is that of all the infernal conspiracies and villainies in the country the worst is the Sea Fisheries Association. The matter is very highly technical and the wisest man in the world is the man who is wise enough to know the things he does not know. I do not know the technicalities of the fish trade, so having taken counsel with the exceptionally able and distinguished officers of my Department I determined to set up an advisory council. We ask every interest in the trade, including the trade unions, to name representatives, and I cannot sufficiently thank Father E. J. Coyne, S.J., for undertaking the extremely laborious assignment of being chairman of that advisory committee. Those of us who know of his disinterested and distinguished work in the service of the people of this country will not be surprised to find him in the service of the inshore fishermen as well. It is not everybody who can appreciate the incomparable value of his unique services in the very difficult position of chairman of that council.

A number of contentious points have been referred to that council for deliberation. Some of them are points which I have touched upon this evening. If I had been more discreet perhaps I would simply have said: "I have nothing to say until the committee reports," but I do not know why I should not have said these things because, as I have stated, my mind is closed to none of the questions of method but it is absolutely closed, as I think that most Deputies' minds will be closed, on the fundamental proposition that the fish market of this country belongs primarily to our own fishermen.

So soon as that advisory body reports, I shall consider its recommendations. If I agree with them I shall bring them before the House and ask the House to take any legislative steps that may be necessary to give effect to them. If I do not agree with them, I shall bring them before the House and recommend the House to reject them.

There are two other matters which I should like to mention. One is prospective legislation; the other is the efforts we are making to improve fresh-water fisheries. As Deputies are aware, there are as many theories as there are advisers about how best to increase the brown trout population of any river or lake. One hopefully anticipates the setting up of a hatchery and producing there astronomical numbers of fry, bearing them off in buckets and pouring them into a river only to be told by some wiseacre that one decent pike will eat the whole of them in the course of a day. I believe that is true.

I determined that I would try an experiment the other way round. I know a lake myself where all the coarse fish were removed and now there are no trout in it bigger than about 3½ ounces, and, if you cast three flies over the lake, you will get three 3½-ounce trout out of it, because the trout have multiplied so rapidly and the food has not that the fish do not grow and you get an immense number of very small fish. I have, therefore—and I shall be glad to hear the opinion of Deputies who have interested themselves in this matter—asked my Department to undertake, as an experiment, the trawling of four small lakes and the removal from their waters of approximately 75 per cent. of the coarse fish, with a view to determining if that method would sufficiently stimulate the ordinary course of nature to increase the fish population of the lake and attendant river, while, at the same time, not permitting so rapid an increase in the trout population as to impinge unsatisfactorily on the total available food supply. It may not have any satisfactory results but it may.

Simultaneously, one of our officers is going over to Loch Leven, which is supposed to be one of the best lakes in Scotland for fish propagation and work of that kind, and which, I think, is the centre of the maintenance and development of all the Scottish fisheries. We propose that he should undertake a course of observation to see how things are done there. If any other Deputy has any suggestion to make which he thinks would be of value for the purpose of improving inland fisheries, I shall be very glad to hear it.

I know that I ought to go on to say that if we are going to improve the inland fisheries for the benefit of our neighbours, our neighbours ought to pay something by way of a modest duty on their rods. Never, so long as I am here, will I ask any country or city boy in this country to pay a duty for using a fishing rod. If I could prevail on the lads down the country to go out fishing and to make it a habit, I would be sorely tempted to set up a system of making them a present of a fishing rod. Anything we do here, in any circumstances, should create no deterrent whatever to any citizen of this State enjoying the amenities which God put there for the enjoyment of us all.

The Americans have a very good rule in that regard. It does not matter how rich or how powerful you are, if there is running through your demesne a river with trout in it, every naturalised citizen of the United States of America has a right to cross your wall and proceed to the bank of that river by the shortest course and there to carry on the constitutional right of a United States citizen to fish in a United States river, and nobody can say him nay. There are heavy penalties in America for taking from a river a fish below a certain size and they are very rigorously enforced. I never knew I was as good a runner in my life as on one occasion in Wisconsin on which I was returning from a river and discovered that I had upon my person a fish which might not be expected to measure up to the requirements of the appropriate officer; but, apart from that, so long as I had a fishing rod and wanted to fish, I had the right to cross any man's land by the shortest way to the edge of the lake or river on his property.

I wish we could hope to enforce such a regulation about the size of fish here, but I am a great believer in practical politics. If we made a regulation to-morrow that anybody who took a fish less than six inches out of a river must put it back again, we would simply be making a law which would not be enforced, because we would not be able to enforce it. We must only try to persuade people that they ought not to take fish fry like that and ought not to go out and catch trout fry on bent pins in order to use them as a bait for pike. We ought to try to persuade our people to co-operate with us, in so far as they can, in destroying the vermin which prey upon game fish. They could do a lot to help, if they would, to persuade our people, now that the fish mainly belong to them, that the poacher who fishes out of season is an enemy of the whole community and not of somebody belonging to the landlord class.

I hope I will not shock my more conservative colleagues when I say that I wonder if it will ever be possible here to buy out all the fishing rights on all our rivers. I like the American system. I like the idea that, if God put fish in a river in Ireland, everybody in Ireland, from the smallest to the biggest, has an equal claim to that fish, if he can catch it, and I think it is a reasonable approach. If we accepted that view, it would mean that we would have to acquire the rights vested in certain individuals for a fair compensation and would have to try to grow up in our sense of responsibility, and recognise that, now that it had become the duty of no individual to protect the rivers, it was the duty of us all to protect them and to collaborate with the servants of the State who are charged with the responsibility of seeing that they were not recklessly plundered and ill-used. I wonder could we reasonably look forward to the day when we might legitimately invest public money in such a purchase for the people, in the knowledge that, when we had acquired them for ourselves, we could preserve them for ourselves and for the guests whom we chose to make welcome to that amenity of ours.

It is an ideal towards which I should like to work, but I have no proposals to put before the House now beyond a respectful request that such Deputies as are interested in the matter would fortify me with their opinions on it. If there are any questions any Deputy wishes to ask me in regard to this matter I need hardly say that I shall be only glad to answer them. I think I should perhaps say that, owing to a variety of circumstances, certain imports of smoked fish come in here from Great Britain. I carefully considered that question in relation to our visit to London and came to the conclusion that the most satisfactory way of settling that matter was that we should get the British fish-purchasing authority, who buy cured fish for the British and continental market, to bid us a fair price for a good quantity of our cured fish. It would be an easier way of providing for all legitimate interests. We have approached the appropriate branch of the Ministry of Food and negotiations are still proceeding. I hope we may be able to get —we may not, and it forms no constituent part of any agreement that has been initialled or is to be initialled, being quite a separate negotiation—a satisfactory market for the bulk of our cured fish which would greatly assist our herring industry. I think it is unnecessary for me to add that the Sea Fisheries Association and the resources of the Department are all constantly engaged in trying to find markets for the herring and the mackerel that our people catch but, as Deputies know as well as or better than I do, that is not such an easy job at the present time.

I should also refer to the Killybegs boat-yard. I understand we are going to launch a boat there. I am feeling rather piqued about the launching of the boat because it is going to be launched on the day before an anniversary meeting in Ballingarry. I have been very much drawn between the launching of the boat in Killybegs and the centenary of Ballingarry but I am going to Ballingarry and I will not see the launching of the boat in Killybegs. However, I can assure Deputy Brady that, if I cannot be there in person, I shall be there in spirit. I know he will miss me, as would Deputy Neil Blaney. All of us will have reason to be proud of the amenity now provided at Killybegs and those who enjoy its advantages may well think with warm regard of both the Minister and the Association who were responsible for providing it. I assure all my Fianna Fáil colleagues on the far side, and Deputy McMenamin, that if they make nice speeches paying tributes to my predecessor and to the members of the Sea Fisheries Association for the excellent work that has been done at Killybegs they can, on my behalf, say, "Hear hear"! to each of the several speeches they will make.

Dr. Ryan

Everybody in this House will have to agree with what the Minister has said, that the livelihood of our inshore fishermen must be our first consideration, the second being that we have an obligation to the consumers to see that they get fish in reasonable variety and at a fair price at all times. The difficulty always has been, of course, to try to fit one thing in with the other, and in trying to satisfy the consumer and at the same time to safeguard the inshore fishermen, the consideration of trawler companies and the imports of fish arises.

I do not think I differ from the Minister with regard to a trawler company. I thought when he said first that a trawler company was inconsistent with the inshore fishermen that I would have to disagree. But he went on to say that a trawler company of a kind is not inconsistent. So, the only thing that has to be decided is what size the trawler company should be. A trawler company of a kind is necessary, in my opinion, to give a variety because, at certain times, we will only get a very poor variety in inshore fishing and we should try, if possible, to supplement that variety by going further afield. That can only be done by trawlers. Therefore, we can all agree that in safeguarding the inshore fishermen we need a trawler company of a certain size.

There is, as the Minister says, a trawler company in existence but it has very old boats and the company needs to be reconstructed in many ways. If the Minister can succeed in getting all the interests concerned into one company, he will have done something that it was found impossible to do up to the present. Perhaps he will succeed. I hope if he does succeed, that he will also succeed in getting more modern boats that can land fish here at a lower cost.

Nobody in this House will grudge the praise that the Minister gave to the Sea Fisheries Association.

Mr. Dillon

Would I have agreement in the proposition that it would be inappropriate that the kind of trawler to which the Deputy and I have referred should remain the monopoly of one interest in the trade?

Dr. Ryan

Yes, I think I would agree with the Minister on that. The Minister, probably has been told, if he has not come across the various files, that for the last seven or eight years, the Minister for Agriculture has been trying to work out a scheme but so far has not succeeded.

Mr. Dillon

It is most difficult.

Dr. Ryan

I think we would also agree that there are times when neither the inshore fishermen nor the trawlers will give us the fish we require and we must be free to get fish from outside the country, in other words, to import fish. The system that has been in operation for a few years back of nominating the Sea Fisheries Association as the importer is, I am quite sure, by far the best system because, as between the various commercial importers, they, at least, are neutral and if they bring in the fish and auction it, as they have been doing, no wholesaler can have any grievance that one person is being favoured more than another.

I have said that none of us would disagree with the Minister in the praise he has given the Sea Fisheries Association. They have done great work. I believe it is a fact that practically all the fishermen who were dealing with the Sea Fisheries Association now have their boats free. Some may owe a little money yet but most of them have their boats free, so that the association did great work in supplying their members with boats and gear and in helping their members to market their fish.

The Minister said a very true thing, that hatcheries, regarded purely from the point of view of figures, appeared to be deceptive. It is true that a hatchery goes to a great deal of trouble to supply fry to various fishing clubs or societies and it is true that a very small number of fish let loose in these rivers would lay as many eggs as had been purchased by the clubs or societies. But I think the Minister and others will agree also that there is a psychological effect in having these hatcheries because, if a society or club purchase a certain number of fry, they have more interest in protecting the river than if the river is allowed to develop in the wild way. From that point of view, I think we have a better spirit amongst the sportsmen and clubs that look after the stocking of rivers by means of hatcheries. The psychological effect is important also in the matter of a licence being required for the rod in the fishing of brown trout. I would advocate that a small fee is useful, not so much from what the conservators get out of it, because they will not get very much more than will pay their expenses in connection with it, but because if young people were going out to fish in those rivers, who were perhaps not so responsible or not so much inclined to have regard to the future and to the necessity for having the rivers properly stocked and giving a good yield, if they have to pay a certain small fee for their licence they will be more particular about what they do. It is the psychological effect of charging them a small fee and giving them a licence and a certain amount of responsibility in going out to fish that is useful. I do not mind if the fee is very small. When I was bringing in the Bill in 1939, I spoke of five shillings as a nominal sum, but I do not mind if it is lower, even 2/6.

The Minister spoke of aiming at having all the banks of all our rivers free to fishermen. There are two restrictions at present—a man must have a licence to fish, a rod licence, and must have permission from the person who owns the river bank. There are, of course, public fisheries where no permission is necessary. Many of our rivers are privately owned and some of the estuaries are privately owned, while the banks are owned by the people who own the land along the side of the river—these are the riparian owners. Even if a person is licensed to carry a rod, he must also get permission from the owner of the bank. If the Minister can succeed in making the banks free to the fishermen, it will be a very good thing indeed. In the 1939 Act, a provision was inserted—probably the most important provision in the Act—giving the Minister power to take over on behalf of the State the estuarian fisheries that were in private ownership. I think we should commence there, and if the Minister wants to have free fishing it is only natural to think that he should start at the mouth of the river. I would like him, therefore, when concluding this debate, to indicate if he intends to proceed in the near future with taking over these estuarian fisheries and, if they were all taken over, whether he would proceed up the river, taking over the rights on the banks, as he mentioned, so that we would eventually reach that very desirable point of freedom that they have in America, where every man, as the Minister told us, can fish in any river he likes.

I believe the Minister intended to mention the consolidation of fishery laws, but did not actually come to it.

Mr. Dillon

Yes.

Dr. Ryan

For some time, the Department has been preparing that consolidation. Perhaps the Minister would tell us the present position, when he is concluding. I am very interested in the consolidation of the laws in general and had hoped, when I was in charge of that Department, that the Department of Fisheries would be the first to bring in the consolidation of the laws relating to fisheries. I think it has made considerable progress.

Mr. Dillon

Yes, and I think it will, largely as a result of the Deputy's work and that of his successor.

Dr. Ryan

I hope the Minister will succeed in getting it in force.

Sir John Esmonde

Like the last speaker, I represent a constituency which is considerably interested in the fishing industry. We have two sides of the County Wexford which are bordered by the sea—the Irish Sea on one side and the Atlantic on the other. In addition, we have three types of fishing—sea fishing, tidal water fishing and the ordinary fresh water fishing.

Could the Minister say what persons will be acceptable to give advice or evidence to the advisory council he proposes to set up? There are some grievances in the minds of the sea fishermen in County Wexford, but having regard to the fact that the Minister has said he is setting up this council, I do not propose to go into the details here. They are of a somewhat technical character and concern, amongst other things, the marketing and the price of fish. Perhaps the Minister would instruct the council to receive a statement of the case of the Wexford fishermen, so that they may have before them the views of this very important section of the community in connection with fishing.

The Minister mentioned, in connection with inshore fishing, that there are occasions when it is difficult to land fish during ungovernable weather, and he also mentioned equipment. The first most necessary equipment for the seafishing industry is adequate harbour and quay facilities. In County Wexford, in some cases, those facilities are practically non-existent and in others they are in a very bad state; and what might be governable weather with proper habour facilities is ungovernable weather otherwise.

We suffer also through the presence, from time to time, of foreign poachers. Foreign ships come from quite distant parts and can be seen very clearly from the shore, fishing away for long periods on end. Once or twice, these vessels have been captured and brought in and there have been prosecutions, but that is not the way to deal with the matter. In order to cure the evil, I am afraid it will be necessary to invoke the protection of the State and have some vessel sent down there to see that these foreign trawlers do not poach upon our legitimate preserves. They come there with superior equipment and do a great deal of damage to the fish generally and to the whole district around. I had intended to deal with various grievances, but as I anticipate that the Minister or his council will receive, by way of a well-documented case, these particular grievances which apply to County Wexford, that would be the most practical way of dealing with the matter.

With regard to fishing on the rivers, I do not wish to be described as a conservative and never felt at any time that I was a conservative in my views, but if I take the opposite view to the Minister I would have to plead guilty to being a conservative in this matter. He has mentioned that the fish in American rivers belong to the public. There is a vast difference between the United States of America and Canada where there are huge rivers and vast resources and this country of ours, and I do not see for a moment how he is going to put any scheme like that into operation. I gather that what is at the back of his mind is that, at some future date, having prepared the ground by the necessary propaganda, he will acquire compulsorily the fishing rights in all the rivers of this country. That sounds very nice on paper, but what would be the result? You would have to build a little rail on each side of the river from the mouth to its source in order to ensure to the landowner, whether he was a big or a small one living alongside the river, that his property is preserved, because the position will be this: whether he has five acres or 500 acres he will not be able to prevent the whole population of the district, if necessary, going on to his land and saying: "We have a right to come here; the right to take fish out of this river belongs to us."

That is the first practical difficulty in the way. It is different in America where you have wide open spaces. It might be feasible in districts where you have open mountains or at the estuaries of rivers, but it is not feasible in between where you have hedges and ditches, trees, crops and shrubberies. The thing would be absolutely impossible. I venture to think that, with all the goodwill in the world, the Minister will not be able to create a public point of view in favour of his proposal. Perhaps at first the balance of public opinion would be in favour of his proposal, even in spite of the fact that the legitimate owners might object. But there is more in it than that. The next proposition would be that the rabbits belonged to the public, and that people will say that the apples growing on the trees belong to the public, and you might finish by saying "Well, let us give the land and everything else to the public and we hope you will all be such good citizens that we are all going to live under a system where nobody will do any harm to anybody else." In the end you would have the whole country in a state of chaos.

I think the Minister, when he comes to consider the matter, will agree that I am right. Now, these schemes are all very fine in theory, but they do not work out in practice. If one man is entitled to go in another will say that he is entitled to go in and then everybody will be entitled to go in. Anybody who had any experience of having land near a country town, or near a place where there is a large number of people—suppose you have timber on it or large quantities of blackberries— is well aware that children and grownups from the nearby towns will cross the fences and go in on that land. They can do a considerable amount of damage to farmers' fences. I think that possibly there may be some other and better way of providing angling facilities for the public generally.

There is one other matter to which I would like to refer. The Minister, in his statement, seemed to envisage a state of affairs in which our fishing industry will be confined to providing fish for use at home only, and not in any way as part of an export trade. Not knowing the details, I do not know how that could be managed. I do know that in the sea surrounding our shores we have a vast quantity of fish. It is the responsibility of the Department to see that our fishermen win from the sea the largest quantity of fish possible. I am astonished that we have not so far been able to bring that about. A country like ours, surrounded by the sea, should be able to establish a huge fishing industry, one that would bring us in valuable money from abroad. I do not know whether our failure is due to not having trawlers or to our method of following inshore fishing, but it does strike one as rather strange that with the same sea as that which touches the shores of European countries, we are not able to avail of the fish which is there. Deputies are aware that from Brittany right up to Denmark there are thousands and thousands of people engaged in winning fish from the sea. It is a source of valuable wealth to the people of those countries. It seems to me that our objective up to now has been, and is going to continue to be, merely a fishing industry to satisfy the wants of the population of this country. If that is so, our aim is at a very low target, and we are abandoning a valuable asset. I think we should aim at developing an industry which would give us a valuable export trade. I do not think I have anything more to say except, as I said at the beginning, that I hope the Wexford fishermen will be given an ample opportunity of presenting their case, from their point of view, to the advisory council.

Mr. J. Flynn

I raised a question here about Kelvin engines for fishermen on the South Kerry coast and I asked the Minister when the trade talks were taking place to mention this matter to the responsible authorities in England and I am glad to say that the Minister has informed the House that he has done so. On behalf of the fishermen concerned who found it almost impossible to get adequate supplies of this type of engine for their fishing boats, I sincerely thank him.

I wish to say that this Estimate is not sufficient. I am open to correction, but I think when you have deducted a certain amount for the repayment of loans and all that, it is possibly about £24,000. I suggest that it should be at least £44,000. With the increased price of gear and other types of equipment that fishermen require, in the areas I know particularly, the amounts scheduled for this Estimate are not at all adequate. I realise that the fact that some of this equipment is in short supply, as in the case of engines, and that it is practically impossible to get other equipment, might have induced the Department not to ask for or schedule the necessary increased amount.

I agree entirely with what the Minister said about the price of fish. Deputy Ryan referred to legislation which was to be introduced here some years ago to make provision for the acquisition of fisheries and giving compensation to the owners, and giving over these rivers to the men employed in the industry, but nothing was done about it. It was just hung up, as far as I know. I am looking forward with hope and confidence to the Minister at least enacting, or causing to be enacted, what they had intended to do some years ago but did not proceed with. I have a case in my mind in my own constituency where one of the most valuable fisheries in Ireland is controlled by one man. As the years went on he and his predecessors bought every available fishery, and when this legislation was pending about 1932 they realised that they would be entitled to tremendous compensation. Even since then they have bought in fisheries and they stand to win by scores of thousands of pounds in the transaction. Nevertheless, I agree entirely with the Minister, even in the case of men of this type who gambled and speculated, because they saw that if this legislation was put through and provided they could show returns over three years, they would be compensated on their average return over those years. He realised that and bought valuable fisheries adjacent to the one he already owned, in the hope of this legislation being put through, when he would get about £50,000. Despite all that, I, on behalf of the fishermen, welcome what the Minister has in mind, that the Government should in the future, when it thinks fit, at the earliest possible date, take over fisheries such as that, so that the fishermen who are already in that industry can be made part owners of it. Another suggestion was that, after paying compensation to that owner, the State should run it as a paying concern and pay these men a standard weekly wage.

The State could control these fisheries as a nationalised industry and run them in the same way as the Dairy Disposals Company are running the creameries at the moment and give much-needed employment at a decent wage. They certainly can afford to do this, because this fishery to which I referred is referred to as a gold mine. Thousands of pounds are netted each year, but we had to go in time and again over the years to this landlord on behalf of the unfortunate fishermen. He paid them 15 years ago the starvation wage of 17/- a week plus 3d. per fish commission. They had to run the chance of getting scarcely anything in some periods even if on other occasions it worked out all right. Although this man made colossal profits they were never passed on to them. When the Fianna Fáil Government came in, although this legislation did not go far enough, it compelled men like him to advance. He did advance, but it is still a low rate. I hope I will see the day when not one man but ten men are employed at a decent wage.

Mr. P.J. Burke

I am delighted that the Minister spoke so well of the inshore fishermen. While the Minister stated that he was going to make representations to get engines, the inshore men are in a bad way for better-class boats. If they are to fish all the year round they want larger boats, and I hope that will not be long delayed. The previous Minister did a good job by trying to get going the art of making boats in Killybegs. Representations have been made to the Sea Fisheries Association to try to get engines, and I hope that the Minister will expedite that matter. There are some applicants for boats at Howth, and at the moment there is unemployment among this good type of fisherman and the sooner boats are brought to that area the better.

At Loughshinny and Rush we wanted to have something done for the harbours and boats. Deputy Ryan dealt with the boats. When the weather is very bad it is very hard for fishermen to get out, and during it, there is a lot of unemployment among fishermen. I would like Sea Fisheries to institute some welfare scheme to do something for the people at a time like that. While Sea Fisheries have done a good deal, there is a good deal yet to be done.

We have had a lot of talk from time to time about the transport of fish and the provision of freezing plants. That matter has been discussed with the Sea Fisheries Association and the officials gave it very sympathetic consideration. However, if we are to put this industry on its feet we should consider the provision of freezing plant in order to have a better supply of fish for the consumer. In this country fish is very dear for the consumer. One of the points raised on numerous occasions is the controlled price of fish in the market. There is a controlled maximum price, but there is no controlled minimum price and, when there is a glut in the market, it can be sold at any price under the maximum. A number of fishermen in North Dublin feel that the law of supply and demand should be allowed to prevail. That is a matter I have taken up with the previous Minister and I would ask the present Minister to look into it.

There are a number of big towns in this country in which fish cannot be procured except by hotels and other people who order it specially. If we want to improve the industry we should provide for the quick transport of fish from the port at which it is landed to the inland towns. In addition, the fish should be properly handled because there is nothing so disgusting as fish when it is in a decaying condition. These are matters which should be considered very favourably as they would improve the conditions for our inshore fishermen. Another thing which we could fall back upon here is the canning industry. It should be possible to establish a good canning industry to take the surplus fish off the market in which there is sometimes a glut. That is one way in which the freezing plant would be useful.

I was glad to hear the Minister say he was not in favour of trawlers. Trawlers may be all right in their own way, but four or five good steam trawlers would at least supply all the fish we require here. All along our coast we have a number of fishermen whose interests we should protect as much as possible. I am also anxiously awaiting decision as to the advisory committee. Of course the Sea Fisheries Association is composed of every section of the fishing industry and fishermen have an opportunity of putting their views before the association. The association is a very democratic one and the officials are most helpful. The position, however, is that a number of fishermen are still dissatisfied possibly because of the shortage of gear, the difficulty of procuring it and the fact that it is very expensive. The provision of boats, better gear, better engines and the clearing of the harbours to receive the boats all form a big problem in the North County Dublin.

Another matter to which I should like to refer is the importation of smoked fish. The Minister suggested to-night that he would try to get some smoked fish exported in return for that. That may be a feasible suggestion and I should like to see the matter taken up. Generally speaking, I should like to see more money spent on the fishing industry. I should like to see it looked upon as one of our national industries and a good supply of fish made available for every part of the country. We should also have a better type of boats and gear and the harbours should be dredged.

Mr. McMenamin

Listening to the Minister and the ex-Minister one would think that everything was all right with regard to this industry. Earlier in the evening the Minister was referring to the wage of 55/- a week paid to the agricultural labourer. I wonder did he ever seek the views of any housewife with five or six children who has to try to provide fish for herself and the children. It is notorious that in this country it is almost impossible to get fish in any small or fairly large town even once a week. It is an extraordinary position that in a country such as this, where this enormous source of food is available at our doors, we have failed to provide it for our people. There is certainly something radically wrong there. I hope this committee which is to advise the Minister on matters generally will make a report upon which action will be taken so as to provide the Irish people with a reasonable supply of fish throughout the year.

The Minister said that there were some weeks in the year when our boats could not go to the sea and therefore we had to import fish from Great Britain. I think I know rural Ireland from Donegal down to Cork as well as any man, and I can say that one of the most difficult things for any housewife to procure, even once a week, is a supply of fish at a reasonable price. In fact it is impossible to get it in some places except it is ordered specially in advance. The Minister stated that a boat is to be launched at Killybegs some day this week and that he regretted he cannot attend. I regret also that the Minister cannot attend. I think the Minister was hardly candid enough in dealing with the supply of fish and the providing of fish for this country. As I understand it, the position of the Sea Fisheries Association is that they have now on their books applications for at least 100 fishing boats of the inshore type. The capacity of the boat-yard at Killybegs, in my native county, is an output of five boats per year. That being so—and I am reliably informed that that is the situation—it is going to take 20 years to meet the number of applications for new boats that are at present on the books of the Sea Fisheries Association. How can we expect a reasonable supply of fish, or even a continuance of the limited supply we have been getting in the past, if it will take 20 years to meet the current orders for boats? What is going to happen each year with regard to the depreciation in the number of our boats due to wreckages and so forth? There are parts of the coast in my constituency where in one night five or ten new boats may be smashed to pieces.

That is the position in regard to the Association's boat-yard at Killybegs and yet last year the association closed down the boat-yard at Meevagh. They took away the livelihood of some 14 families there who were boat-builders and all the other things that that appertains to by tradition. That means of livelihood had been provided for them there by the Congested Districts Board which was set up by the British Government. It took an Irish Government in the year 1947 to take away the livelihood of those people. The entire machinery for boat-building, so far as the association is concerned, was removed to a boat-yard that can only supply five boats a year and which will take, at that rate, 20 years to clear off the present orders on their books. That being so, one must examine this problem in a practical way in an attempt to find a practical solution.

The Minister referred to smoked fish for consumption in this country and probably for export also. Where fish are smoked in a factory I think it is absolutely essential, at that point, to have a quick-freeze plant. In that way, huge fishing catches which might occur for a week or a fortnight could be dealt with immediately.

As things are at the moment, the factory cannot deal quickly enough with a large amount of fish so as to avoid a condition where they are not suitable for curing. Therefore, somewhere around our coast—I do not mind whether it be at Kinsale, Killybegs or Downings—there should be some point from which the fish could be taken by lorry to a railhead, to a quick-freeze plant. It is remarkable that, in a country like this which has a fishing industry with some of our people at least semi-dependent on it for a livelihood we have no way of preserving huge catches of fish to cover the period referred to by the Minister. The fishermen, owing to the limited capacity of their boats, are unable to go to sea and we are, therefore, dependent on imports. The price of imported fish makes it impossible for the poor people and even the lower middle-class people to purchase it. In my opinion a great deal requires to be done in this connection. I would say that not even the fringe of this problem has been touched in this country. The late Congested Districts Board, considering its limitations and the fixed amount of money that was made available by the British Government for its resources, did as much for this country in this connection as we are doing now under a native Government. Some steps should be taken to provide a supply of new boats as soon as possible. I understand that the private boat-yards are so booked up with orders that they will not take any orders at all from fishermen generally. We are, therefore, thrown back on the resources of the association.

I would suggest to the Minister— and I am not doing so by way of a sop— that the Meevagh boat-yard should be reopened if the conditions with regard to orders on the books of the Sea Fisheries Association are such as I have stated. Alternatively, I would suggest that a permanent engineer and a permanent boat builder be stationed at Meevagh so that these small vessels —if they get into serious trouble—will not have to travel, say, from Moville at the mouth of Lough Swilly to Killybegs for repairs. That is highly dangerous and at times it is impossible for such small vessels to undertake the journey.

The Minister has referred to the fresh water problem. He has referred to the fact that on various lakes and rivers we get a large number of brown trout that are of a very small size. I do not believe that to trawl lakes and rivers with a view to the removal from these waters of approximately 75 per cent. of coarse fish in them will solve the problem. The Minister spoke about sending a representative to Lough Leven to study the problem there. I understand that years and years ago all the information available from Lough Leven was available to the Department. I do not think there is anything new to be discovered there at all. My information is that the size of the brown trout generally around our rivers is due to the fact that mainly these rivers all rise in the mountains. Because of the amount of bog water in the upper reaches of these rivers the small size of the brown trout is absolutely and completely due to a lack of calcium. There is also the problem of the trout becoming too numerous either in a lough or a river but particularly in a lough. They consume the entire feed in it and the only thing then is to put a net on it and to reduce their number.

You have the twin problems in regard to the size of trout—one is the feed and the other is the deficiency in calcium. As a result of these twin problems the trout in our rivers do not attain a size commensurate with the rivers. These rivers rise high up in the mountains, pass through bog land and are totally deficient in calcium. If we could overcome these drawbacks we would ultimately improve the size of our trout. I take it the calcium deficiency could be made good by putting calcium into the lakes and rivers.

Mr. Dillon

I would have my work cut out for me, Deputy.

Mr. MacMenamin

I think you would. I merely want to point out to the Minister the difficulties that confront him. There are plenty of fish in our rivers. There are plenty of people who have never fished in their lives but have plenty of ideas in their heads as to how these problems can be overcome. I do not think, however, that we can overcome them. Some people ask why it is that if our salmon grow so large in our waters the trout do not thrive to the same extent. It is a well-known fact that salmon do not feed in the fresh water. The salmon return to the sea every autumn, coming back to their native rivers in the spring.

There are two other matters which I wish to raise on this Estimate. One is the provision of accommodation and protection for the fishermen at Glengad and the other is a similar protection and accommodation for the fishermen at Portaleen. These unfortunate men live in desperately exposed places. There is no landing accommodation of any kind. In one locality there was a makeshift landing ground with a crane. Apparently, the wheel of the crane became rusty and the county council ordered it to be dismantled. It has been dismantled and the fishermen have now no means of hauling up their boats to safety. At Greencastle, some 20 miles away, there is landing accommodation. These are the only two possible places in which the local fishermen can land their boats or their fish. I would appeal to the Minister to take immediate steps to provide facilities, either at Greencastle or Portaleen, in order that these men can land their boats and protect them in stormy weather.

I want to say a word now about the herring fishing. In certain parts of my constituency shoals of herring come in two or three times a year. I think that it is essential that the local fishermen should have facilities provided for them in order that they can deal with these herrings as quickly as possible inside the three weeks or the month during which the shoal lasts. At the moment there is no way of dealing with them expeditiously. I would urge upon the Minister that he should establish a herring station somewhere on the western coast between Donegal and Cork. I would like it for Donegal, but I do not claim it for Donegal. It might be better to have it at, say, Sligo. They should be provided with factories competent to prepare and cure the fish for use in time of scarcity or for export.

The Minister has apparently anchored himself to inshore fishing. That being so, I think we should give the Minister full power to put these inshore fishermen into full production by supplying them with all the necessary equipment. I have already informed the Minister that the boat-yard at Meevagh has been dismantled. I think that should be reestablished because it must be appreciated that if an enormous number of boats have to be built for these inshore fishermen there will be a heavy annual replacement necessary. These boats are small and easily wrecked. The annual loss is high. If private yards will not take orders for the building of these boats then some other steps will have to be taken in order to supplement the output of the boat-yard at Killybegs. I am hoping for a long period of prosperity for the industry there. Once it has been rehabilitated as a first-class fishing station there is no reason why it should not be successful. I would appeal again to the Minister to consider the urgent necessity for making provision for these fishermen in the Inishowen peninsula.

Mr. Larkin

I think it is as well that all the interests represented in this House should very briefly express their viewpoints in regard to the policy enunciated by the Minister so that, if there is agreement on that policy, we can give him the utmost support. If we are agreed upon policy, certainly there should be an equal agreement on the need for urgent and effective action to remedy the many difficulties that exist in the fishing industry at the moment. I can speak for a very large body of workers who are directly concerned in the industry in regard to wholesale and retail distribution. They have a certain viewpoint in relation to the policy enunciated by the Minister. It is as well that their attitude towards that policy should be made quite clear.

In speaking for those workers who are engaged in the wholesale and retail trade, I want to make it quite clear that we are wholeheartedly in support of the Minister when he says that it should be the foundation of the policy to protect the existing livelihood of inshore fishermen and to develop that as far as possible so that they will be assured of not merely the present standard of living but, what is much more important, an enhanced standard. I cannot say at the moment that the return which these fishermen secure as a result of their arduous and dangerous labours is an attraction. So far as the men and women engaged in the wholesale and retail side of the industry are concerned, they are most anxious that inshore fishing should be developed. At the same time they have certain interests in that development which require both understanding and protection. It is not quite correct to say that the Sea Fisheries Association is the organisation that has displayed an interest in the welfare of the inshore fishermen. The men and women engaged in the retail and wholesale side of it have on two occasions recently taken very effective steps to show their sympathy in a practical way. The livelihood of many of them is dependent at times on the flow of fish, principally for smoking.

We have only one wholesale market and that is in the city. They have taken the stand that they are not prepared to handle imported fish if the importation would be to the detriment of the interests of the inshore fishermen. Last year when fishermen had to take direct action to try to establish a fair price from the buyers, the men and women engaged in the wholesale and retail trade expressed their practical sympathy by refusing to handle fish which could not be regarded by the fishermen as having been fairly dealt with, and they definitely refused to handle any fish that might be brought in for the purpose of breaking the action of the inshore fishermen. Therefore, there is a common interest between the workers engaged in the catching and on the distribution side.

We all agree on basing our policy on the development of the interests of the inshore fishermen, and while that is a problem that has its social and economic aspect, it is also a problem for the consumers. I feel that, having paid our tribute to the Sea Fisheries Association, much more requires to be done. In the Estimates I notice a provision of £20,000 for boats. I understand the position has eased, and there is the fact that we have a shipyard at Killybegs preparing to launch its first boat. Certain supplies of engines are available. One would have thought a much larger sum could be utilised this year if we have got a certain supply of engines coming in. Is there any reason why the construction of the hulls could not be proceeded with, even if it means waiting for a short period for the delivery of the engines? Quite clearly the problem is one of boats and gear but, having started to solve that, we still have a major problem facing us.

I can see no point in asking several thousand men to engage in this arduous way of earning a livelihood, even if they have good boats and gear if, when the catches are brought in, they are sold at such a low price as not to give a reasonable return or at such a price that the average consumer cannot afford to buy. It is quite true, as has been said by speakers here, that so far as supplies of fish in this country are concerned, the supplies do not exist to any great extent outside the big towns. Even in Dublin some weeks ago fish were put on sale in the market and bought and subsequently thrown out because they were unfit for human consumption.

Mr. Dillon

How is that they came to sell bad fish?

Mr. Larkin

The fish came in through the one trawling company we have and that trawler is not suitably equipped for holding fish for long periods. When they were put on sale they were not of good quality. As a matter of fact, it was reported to the Department and certain action was taken. The supply was so short at the time that many shops bought supplies but subsequently found that they could not use them. They were the only fish available in the market at the time. We have had a situation for a period of weeks where quite a large number of retail shops were unable to get supplies of fine fish. Representations were made to the Department to arrange for the importation of fish as a temporary measure. There is a certain objection to that. When these imports are brought in, I agree they should be under the control of the Sea Fisheries Association.

The system of distribution is such that it requires an element of justice. We have in the cities and towns both large and small retail fish merchants and recently the experience has been that quite a large number of the smaller shops have been left without supplies of fine fish because of bad distribution methods. That is part of the problem of the big type of monopoly we have. The Minister should take active steps to give effect to the policy he enunciated of making that monopoly representative of all interests in the trade. It might be made, as he said, an ancillary side to the Sea Fisheries Association because it seems to me that is the only way we can get away from the present bad situation. It seems doubtful that the interests he has in mind will take an active share in the development of the company and therefore we are thrown back on the Sea Fisheries Association taking an interest and thus getting away from a bad situation.

The situation is that we have only one trawling company as a source of supply for one retail combine and when they have their fill of fish what is left is made available for the other interests in the trade. If there is no surplus there are no fish for those outside the combine. It may be true that those connected with the combine have taken the gamble, invested their money and provided themselves with this source of supply, but that is dependent on an effective monopoly. The monopoly is there and it is a continual source of friction because of unfairness in regard to supply, and that situation will continue as long as this is managed on the present basis. Proposals were made to the Minister from other interests to develop trawling on a much broader basis. I agree with him in the attitude he took and in his present stand in relation to developing trawling.

If we are to base our policy on the sustenance and support of the inshore fishermen we must take more effective steps than merely providing boats and gear. Before the war the association developed advertising and developed a public taste for fish and gave the public knowledge that fish could be made available. They tried travelling shops in the rural areas. These are lines that ought to be developed if we are to invest money and supply men with the gear to catch, land and distribute fish. I understand that quite a large number of people believe that because we have to eat fish on one day in the week we have a natural disinclination to eat them on other days. I do not think that is altogether true. It is correct that fish-eating is confined to a small section of the population, but that may be because of price and the difficulty of supply. It is equally true that if fish were available at a more reasonable price and supplies were regular and easy of access the public might be more inclined to avail of them.

If we developed a campaign to bring home to the people the fact that fish are available I believe we could increase the public consumption to quite a large degree. It is a fact that in many of the smaller towns it is practically impossible to obtain fish and I am quite sure there is no town or village in most parts of Ireland where there are not some people who would like to eat fish. At the moment they have got no choice. It is also true that even amongst the ordinary working-class people, years ago when fish was cheaper and a little more readily available, they did not confine their fish-eating to Friday.

Mr. Dillon

Are you sure of that?

Mr. Larkin

Quite sure.

Mr. Dillon

I never eat fish except on Friday and I never will, with the help of God.

Mr. Larkin

If we accept the position that fish is only to be eaten on Friday, the problem is even bigger than we thought it was. I think, however, that is not a correct view, and having got several thousand men directly engaged in the catching side of the industry and 1,000 or 2,000 engaged in distribution, if we were able to develop a reasonably steady market spread over the major part of each week, it would provide those men with a constant source of employment and a somewhat higher standard of living than they enjoy at the present time. It does, however, require something more than merely gear and boats and I think the campaign which the Sea Fisheries Association was developing before the war should receive immediate attention. Even if it were merely confined to the question of developing publicity and providing means of transportation, it would lead to a greater consumption of fish as increased supplies became available.

One other point upon which the Minister touched, to which I should like him to give immediate attention, is the fact that because of our situation in regard to the fishing industry we have at times to face the difficulty that we have not got supplies of home caught fish immediately available. That has been the situation almost every year from the months of January to March because of weather conditions. His solution is to import fish but we should first of all make it quite clear that if we are going to import fish, it is not going to be filleted fish. We have got quite a number of highly skilled men who can fillet fish and if we are going to import fish, there is no reason why that part of the work should be done abroad. Secondly, if fish is to be imported we should try to secure that it is of good quality. I understand that there are difficulties in obtaining supplies of fish at the present time and some of the supplies have not been of particularly good quality. There have been some complaints on that score.

Thirdly, and most important of all, there is a certain amount of criticism in regard, not to the fact that the Sea Fisheries Association is the importing agency—I do not know that there is any objection to that—but to the fact that when fish is imported, supplies are not made available to all retailers on an equal basis, including the Sea Fisheries Association itself. There should be some distinction between the Sea Fisheries Association as an importing agency and as a trading agency. Some of the criticism has been directed to the fact that the association is engaged in retail trading. I accept it that that is not correct, but they have engaged in supplying contracts and the criticism is made that advantage is taken by the trading part of the association of that fact that they are importers and, therefore, have first access to available supplies. I think so long as we agree that it is necessary to have a certain agency for the importation of fish, that agency must be the Sea Fisheries Association, but it should not be allowed to take advantage—I will not say it has taken advantage—of its position in that regard.

Mr. Dillon

It will have a dual function.

Mr. Larkin

It has a very limited function on the retail side but it has given rise to a certain amount of criticism. The most important point is to secure that the association should be the single importing agency. On behalf of the men and women engaged in the wholesale trade, I hope that the development of this industry will be pushed forward to its limit. The Minister should appreciate that he has the fullest support of the House in any requirements from the point of view of finance. So far as the provision of boats is required, every assistance should be given to those engaged in the trade so that we can provide them, not merely with a continuation of their present standards of living, but improve these standards by trying to develop in this country a more extended taste for fish in order to provide a market for the output of the industry.

Mr. B. Brady

We had a very interesting statement from the Minister on this Estimate. I think most Deputies will agree with the remarks of Deputy Larkin that if the Minister intends to carry out the hopes expressed and the expectations aroused by his speech to-night, he will have to make a more generous provision for boats and gear, if he is going to maintain the interests of the inshore fishermen. If we examine the Estimate for this year we find that about £90,000 is being provided under the sub-head for compensation under the Fisheries Act of 1939 and if we deduct that £90,000 from the total amount provided under the Estimate, we shall find that there is a reduction of about £5,000 on the amount provided last year.

When we take into account the circumstances that obtained last year and the previous years, when gear was practically unobtainable and timber for boat building was very difficult to procure, it occurs to me that a greater financial provision should be made this year, now that these materials are in more plentiful supply, if we are going to make any attempt at the development of our inshore fishing. During the war years, apart from the fact that very little was done in the way of mending boats or building new boats, there was a considerable deterioration in the condition of our fishing fleets and consequently it would seem to me that the Minister should have made much greater provision than has been made here to meet that situation. There is also the fact that there is a clamour all along the coasts for extra fishing boats.

While I am on the question of fishing boats, may I say that I think the association are now aware that the type of boat that had been built in previous years, particularly boats intended for seine net fishing, which is the type commonly used in the areas I represent, is not now regarded as suitable. The fishermen are anxious that a boat of a much longer keel should be provided, a boat of a 60 to 75 feet keel. The smaller type of boat, with a 40 to 50 feet keel, is regarded as a more suitable type of boat for the east coast, but I speak for the fishermen of the west coast and they prefer the larger boat which is a more seaworthy craft.

What strikes one as a very strange anomaly is the complaints we have heard of the scarcity of fish, which we know to be a fact, in inland towns. When one contrasts that with the ration, as one might describe it, of the fishermen in the matter of the hours and days they are to fish, it is very hard to reconcile the two situations. We have here, on the one hand, a scarcity of fish, and we find, on the other hand, the Sea Fisheries Association refusing to purchase fish from their members, except fish which has been caught on the days on which the members are allowed to fish. It is true that, in Killybegs, they are confined to three days and, in some weeks, four days. I am open to correction, but I do not believe that they are allowed to fish more than four days in any week, because they are told that there will be a glut on the market, while we know that many towns, not only throughout Ireland but even adjacent to Killybegs, cannot get fish from one year's end to another.

The Sea Fisheries Association take the fish and market them in Dublin. There are facilities for people who want to order fish through the Sea Fisheries Association's agent and to make provision for a regular supply of fish, but the average person does not know of that system and, even if he did, it would not pay the private individual, the man who wants fish for his family, always to have to get in touch with the agent in Killybegs and order his own quantity of fish. Unless we tackle the marketing end, and enable the fishermen to fish when fish are plentiful and provide a market in the inland towns amongst the people who want fish and cannot get it, we will not have dealt in a satisfactory manner with our inland fisheries.

Mr. Dillon

Does the Deputy agree with me that one of the first steps to that end would be the removal of the control of the retail price of fish?

Mr. B. Brady

I do not know whether the retail price of fish has anything to do with it.

Mr. Dillon

You cannot sell fish down the country because the freight charges make it unsaleable.

Mr. B. Brady

What has the retail price to do with the limitation on the fishermen?

Mr. Dillon

You fix a retail price for Dublin and you have to pay freight from Dublin or Killybegs to the point at which the fish is sold. If you have the same retail price in rural Ireland as in Dublin, the freight puts up the cost.

Mr. B. Brady

My complaint about the Sea Fisheries Association is that they collect the fish at Killybegs depôt, lorry it to Dublin and sell it on the Dublin market, but there is no place from Killybegs to Dublin which will get any share of that fish and no attempt whatever is made to develop a market in the towns through which that fish passes.

Mr. Dillon

I am blowed if I know how you would develop a market in the towns through which it passes.

Mr. B. Brady

If that is true, the Minister should not have made the statement he made that he was out to maintain the interests of the inshore fishermen. If we are not able to provide a market for them, there is no use in holding out the hope which he held out to them to-night. I was interested to hear the Minister's statement about the committee which he has set up, and I should like to know whether it will hear evidence or invite written statements from those interested.

Mr. Dillon

Statements, yes, but evidence, no.

Mr. B. Brady

And whether or not the report will be published?

Mr. Dillon

They will make recommendations to the Minister and I will inform the House.

Mr. B. Brady

Another matter mentioned here on other occasions, a matter in which I understood the Sea Fisheries Association and the Department were interested, is the question of providing educational facilities for young people who intend to take up fishing as a profession. One would think that it should not be outside the competency of the Department to devise ways and means of giving educational facilities to those young people in centres convenient to the fishing industry—to give them instruction in the general principles of navigation, the elements of marine biology, the care and maintenance of marine engines and the care and maintenance of nets, and lectures concerning the sea fisheries of the country and of other countries, and in a general way to cater for the young men who propose to go into the fishing industry. I understand that the Department were interested in that matter and that they had hoped to get the Department of Education interested, and I am wondering what steps, if any, have been taken to this end and if any progress has been made along these lines.

The Minister referred to the launching of the first boat from the new boat-yard in Killybegs and intimated that he did not propose to go down there. I do not know whether the Minister, if he had gone down, would have used the occasion, as other members of the Government have used similar occasions, to take credit for the work of their predecessors. The boatyard in Killybegs was completed and work had begun before the change of Government, and, as the Minister admitted, any credit in that respect was due to his predecessor.

Mr. Dillon

You can have a field day to yourselves up there and neither hide nor hair of me will you see. If you want to ask Deputy Smith up, I am sure he will be welcome.

Mr. B. Brady

How the Minister resisted the temptation to go and to use the occasion, as his colleagues have used similar occasions to claim credit for themselves, I do not know.

Mr. Dillon

If we go, you are not pleased; if we do not go you are not pleased. You are as cross as the hind legs of a cat. What do you want us to do?

Mr. T.F. O'Higgins

My remarks will have nothing to do with sea fisheries, which, I think have been dealt with pretty exhaustively, but I want to say that this Estimate deals with a most important industry for the country. We have here in Ireland, by reason of our situation, excellent sea fishery resources, but we also have considerable wealth in our inland rivers and lakes. We have wealth given to us by the fact that Ireland is extensively watered and there is consequently a real wealth in fish in our inland rivers and lakes. That wealth, in the years since we got our freedom, has unfortunately been decreasing each year.

Perhaps by reason of the fact that prior to 1921, big money was interested in inland fishing and ordinary trout and salmon fishing in Ireland was the sport of the rich man, perhaps by reason of the disappearance of that class, we have ceased to value the particular thing they valued and, by neglect, we have allowed some of the most excellent inland fisheries in the world to depreciate and to disappear. Very few people realise that fishing is no longer the pastime of the rich man and the big man. It is the pastime of many workers and a fishing holiday is prized by many ordinary people. Any Deputy who has made a pastime of fishing and who goes to any of the better-known fishing centres, whether lake or river, will always hear the same story, that the big fish were caught years ago, that fishing was always good in the years gone by. That story is so common in this country that there must be something in it.

If the experts in the Department were to carry out a survey of our inland fisheries to-day, they would find that in many of our lakes, the western lakes particularly, there is a disease affecting trout that is new to this country. That is particularly so in the case of a ring of lakes between Roundstone and Clifden, an area in which there are about 100 lakes which were formerly the finest trout-fishing lakes on our western seaboard. To-day there are large lakes, like Loch Fada, which, I am sure, Deputy Bartley is aware of, where the entire stock of fish is rotting away. As soon as they are spawned, they become affected by the disease. That disease has spread through a ring of lakes in that particular part of the West. It is not confined to that area. It is to be found in many other inland lakes in this country and it is my view that that has arisen, because there is no one in the Department of Fisheries who cares about our inland fisheries— not one at all. I am glad the Minister has returned. There they have been for years talking about fisheries.

Mr. Dillon

I am going to dredge four lakes for you.

Mr. T.F. O'Higgins

Dredging lakes has done a considerable amount of harm already.

Mr. Dillon

What else can I do?

Mr. T.F. O'Higgins

It is my view that neglect has brought about this position. The Minister has referred to the dredging of rivers. Any Deputy who can think of a small trout stream down the country realises the appalling damage that has been done by weeds at spawning time. He knows the effect that neglect of the rivers has on our trout fishing. I trust the cleansing of certain spawning streams may bring about good results. The Minister's Department is aware of the particular disease I have mentioned. His Department were made aware of it, not by any efficiency on the part of the Department itself, but through trout associations and fishery associations who brought the matter to their notice. However, they have notice of that particular complaint. They have notice of the harm that has already been caused to a considerable number of lakes in the West and I beseech the Minister not to allow that particular disease to remain, affecting lake after lake, in the years to come. Now is the time it should be tackled. We have an attraction in our fisheries so far as tourists are concerned but we have, which is far far more important, an attraction for our own people and we should not allow it to disappear.

There is a great deal than can be said about fisheries that I would like to say at another time. All these matters require attention. Let the Minister devote as much time as he likes to sea fisheries and to the organisation of sea fisheries and inshore fisheries so that those who take it up as an occupation may make a fair income from it and get a fair price. Let him do that by all means but let him, under no circumstances, neglect our inland fisheries. They have been neglected, perhaps by reason of the fact that there have been too many masters and too many authorities in charge—drainage boards, the Land Commission, private owners and private trout fishing associations, and the Department. There has been no central authority, no one laying down a policy or laying down a manner in which fisheries can be preserved. I would suggest to the Minister that the time has come to have some central authority of experts in charge of inland fisheries, laying down a policy for the general preservation of inland fisheries. I would stress the importance of that particular aspect, which should not be overlooked or forgotten.

Mr. Bartley

There is no question of politics in this Estimate for Fisheries, whatever might be said about Agriculture. I had not intended to refer to inland fisheries but, as Deputy O'Higgins has mentioned my name, I want to tell him that I do know of the disease to which he has referred. Various causes are ascribed.

Mr. T.F. O'Higgins

A priest's curse.

Mr. Bartley

One opinion is that the lakes are all bog lakes and that in a great many of them the waters are too confined. It is a matter that requires the earnest attention of the Department. A great many people, particularly in Connemara, consider that by linking up lakes, a very fine inland fishery could be developed and very possibly that might solve the problem. There is another area that has not been mentioned by Deputy O'Higgins: it is not far from the group of lakes that he mentioned where the incidence of disease is higher. I do not know whether it is a peculiar feature of the district or not or whether it occurs elsewhere or not.

I want to refer to the sea fisheries. The Minister's statement would indicate that he does not intend to do anything. We have been lambasted for neglecting sea fisheries, but, at any rate, we never announced that it was our intention as a policy, to stand still. There was a standstill during the war but the strange thing about the fishing industry is that in time of war the industry booms.

I was a member of the committee of the Sea Fisheries Association up to the beginning of the war. During the pre-war period, the committee had a great deal of work to do. There were many difficulties—principally marketing difficulties—but I knew from my experience, such as it was, in the First World War that a great many of those difficulties would disappear—and they did disappear. The Minister's advisers know that people who had not a £5 note to put down as a purchase deposit on a boat when the war broke out, were able to come along at the end of the war and put down £150 or £200. A great many who began to operate at the beginning of the war were able to pay off the debt before the war ended —and some of them had to pay tidy sums in income-tax as well.

I find it difficult to understand the Minister's attitude towards trawling. The previous Minister conceived the idea of a large trawling company and was prepared to give it a certain amount of State aid. I remember when he announced it here some years ago and I spoke against it myself, as I did not think the State should enter into any large trawling scheme whatsoever. That is not to say I am against trawling. I am in wholehearted sympathy with the Minister when he says that his main purpose is to retain the inshore fishermen. Where we part company is when we come to carrying that out. There were two opposite opinions expressed on the far side to-night. Deputy Sir John Esmonde said that the home market would not support any fishing industry worthy of the name, while Deputy McMenamin said you cannot get fish in any town in the country. The strange thing is that you can adduce evidence to support each of these contradictory views. Deputy Larkin seemed to support Deputy Esmonde's view as well. I do not think you will ever solve that difficulty while the State is the main undertaker in the matter of large-scale fishing.

It is quite obvious, from the Minister's own statement about ungovernable weather, that the type of boat that has been supplied is not suitable at all to carry a supply of fish. It has to operate in accordance with the vagaries of the weather. That being so, you can have only fine weather fishing. I have always been quarrelling with the Sea Fisheries Association on the type of boat which they designed. My view may have been discounted a good deal because I am not a fisherman myself, but if I am not, in any event, like the man who did not go to school but met the scholars, I got my opinions on it from people who have been at it all their lives; and I think that is a sensible thing to do, that no matter how much personal knowledge a man might have, he should always consult others. The West coast of Ireland is obviously not a place where you can operate successfully the same type of boat as would be very suitable on the East coast. The Dublin market is convenient to east coast fishermen and will always make it worth while for a fisherman, with the ordinary type of boat that the Sea Fisheries Association have always been supplying, to get out and get into the industry with that type of equipment.

A larger boat is definitely wanted on the West coast and, as the Minister must know if he has consulted his advisers and people in the business on the West coast of Ireland, the social changes which have been brought about in certain directions have affected the association also. Young people are not now going to go out and operate the type of equipment operated very successfully 30 years ago, or even pre-war. I know one man who is a very active and experienced fisherman and has grown-up sons, and he told me he could not get his own family out fishing with him unless he guaranteed to bring them back in time for the pictures. If you are to counteract that kind of attitude, you can only do it by providing a boat that will offer better amenities than there have been before. To do that, there will have to be a larger boat and I think we will have to aim at a boat for the West coast twice the size of the Sea Fisheries Association's standard boat, which is 36 feet. I believe they have departed now from that and that they are going in for the bigger one, with a deck cabin and wireless and, above all and beyond all, the means of handling fish on board.

Whether a State association like the Sea Fisheries Association is the best agent for handling that type of fishing or not is open to question and possibly the Minister is aware of that, because he has announced that he is going to set up a council to get advice. It may be significant that it was not decided to establish this council until a new association called Muintir na Mara established itself. Comhlachas Iascaigh Mhara, the Sea Fisheries Association as we know it, was not established by the Cumann na nGaedheal Government until a similar effort had been made by another group of fishermen who were organising around the coast at that time to force the Government to do something. Now we have got this Government aid sponsored association, but it lacks, in my opinion, the first characteristic of an association, in the fact that its members do not associate. If you want to get a quorum at the annual meeting, you have to whip up a number of officials, otherwise the annual meeting will collapse for the want of a quorum.

The provision of facilities is so regulated that a man must become a member of the association before he can qualify to get any such facilities. He pays down 6/- and thereafter he pays 1/- a year. The Minister gave us no information at all about the association. He did not tell us how it is functioning or to what extent its membership is live. He did not tell us what the size of the membership is, how many are paid up, how many calls are in arrear and the amount of the arrears. In my opinion, all that information should have been given to us. He did not give us very much information about the possibility of supplying the needs of the fishermen who have applications for boats and gear with the association.

The Minister seems to be all against trawling, but I would like to remind him of the fact that practically all the boats supplied by the association are trawling boats and engaged in trawling, though, unfortunately, on the West coast they are of such a size that they have to do most of the trawling inshore in the bays and inlets which should be left to much smaller craft. I move to report progress.

Progress reported; the Committee to sit again to-morrow.

The Dáil adjourned at 12 midnight to 10.30 a.m. on Friday, 16th July, 1948.