asked the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries the conditions required to enable salmon fishing to be allowed in the Erne Estuary, County Donegal; if he is satisfied that the fish-pass at Kathleen Falls, Ballyshannon is suitable and working satisfactorily; and if he will ensure that readings from the fish counter at Kathleen Falls will be published locally at least three days each week.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Erne Estuary Salmon Fishing.
15.
In the interest of conservation of the salmon stocks a bye-law has been made prohibiting net fishing in the Erne estuary during the present season. While not provided for in the bye-law the intention of my Department is that this suspension will be lifted as soon as a satisfactory escapement of fish upstream has taken place.
I am advised that on the evidence available the fish pass appears to be working satisfactorily. I understand that the readings of the fish counter operated by the Electricity Supply Board at Kathleen Falls are now publicly displayed daily in Ballyshannon.
Originally the figure was 4,000. That was the figure designated as necessary to maintain stocks. That figure was reduced to 2,000 and has now been reduced again to 1,000. Does this not indicate that there is something seriously wrong in so far as the fish pass and the counter are concerned? Secondly, the readings now being publicly displayed were not so displayed up to a few weeks ago. This is information the fishermen should have, and it was information they got in the past right up to this year. Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that it is only since this whole matter came to a head in relation to the fishermen airing their grievances that the readings are once more being publicly displayed?
Arrangements have been made by the ESB to display the readings each day, except Saturday and Sunday, in the window of a business premises in Ballyshannon. The fishermen are aware of this. The operation of the fish pass at Kathleen Falls has been recently examined by the Department's inspector and engineer. They have failed to find any evidence to support any charge that the fish pass is not operating satisfactorily. In fact, all the available evidence is that the pass is working satisfactorily.
Would the Parliamentary Secretary inquire from the experts he sent up there on 12th June whether they are aware that there were dead fish in the pass? Certainly six dead fish came out of the pass after they had gone. Does the Parliamentary Secretary know the cause of these deaths?
I am not aware of that.
Would the Parliamentary Secretary check?
I will inquire.
Is there not a distinct possibility that UDN is present in these fish in the pass but no evidence is emerging of UDN in fish outside in the bay where fishing is going on daily?
I assume these questions were dealt with at the meeting with the fishermen. If there are any outstanding matters that were not dealt with I will be glad to have the information.
Would the Parliamentary Secretary discuss with the people he sent up on 12th June whether UDN could be the cause of death in these fish in the pass and if the fish were there when they were present?
I shall ask the inspector to send the Deputy a statement on the matter.
16.
asked the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries if the ESB have taken any salmon from the River Erne during the past five years; and, if so, the number in each or any year during that period.
During the period in question the ESB took 1,435 salmon in 1970 from their trap on the River Erne and 355 in 1971. In the interests of conservation the trap has not been fished since 1971.
Is the Parliamentary Secretary satisfied, in view of the stringent regulations which have been applied and are being adhered to, according to his own statement, by the fishermen in the Erne estuary that any salmon should have been taken by the ESB in any of these years?
That seems to be a separate question.
Which?
Both.
The one that did not come or the one I have asked?
The one the Deputy has asked.
If it is a separate question I fail to see how the reply meets the requirements of the question at all but, in view of that ruling, I would ask the Parliamentary Secretary to ensure, in the interests of conservation, in view of his decision now to allow the Erne estuary fishermen to start fishing once 1,000 salmon have passed through, there will be no take-off or rake-off of salmon going through the pass at any stage by the ESB?
The Deputy's question related to the salmon from the River Erne during the past five years. I gave him the information: 1,435 in 1970, 355 in 1971 and no fishing since then.
Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that the counter on the fish pass in the estuary at Kathleen Falls is similar to a car speedometer and is not fixed at zero each season?
I am not aware of the machanics of the counter. The only information at my disposal is that it is——
I query very much the accuracy of the truth of the information being supplied to the Parliamentary Secretary, and he must also doubt it since we are now allowing men to fish after 1,000 fish have passed according to this counter, when in the past it was 2,000, previous to that 4,000, and the ESB were taking their rake off as well.
The information at my disposal is that the counter is recording accurately.
Is the fish counter at this pass capable of distinguishing between salmon and sea trout?
It is not. Will the Parliamentary Secretary state categorically that the fish counter is capable of distinguishing between sea trout and salmon?
I cannot say at this stage.