Deputy Alan Shatter has sought and been given permission to raise on the Adjournment the question of the seal population off the Mayo coast.
Adjournment Debate. - Culling of Seals.
I thank you, Sir, for giving me the opportunity to raise this matter on the Adjournment. As a Member of this House who steered through the Wildlife Act in 1975 and 1976 I know that this is a matter that you yourself will have a good deal of concern about. It is of concern to many people throughout the country.
The Minister is not here. We had better wait for a moment.
I was saying that this matter has been of concern to many people throughout the country and I have received many representations about it. In 1981 there was slaughtering of seals and seal cubs on Inishkea Island that many people found horrific and disturbing and it sickened many in this country and elsewhere and gave rise at the time to considerable public outcry. As a result of those events in 1982 the Sea Shepherd Group camped on Inishkea Island and in or about this time last year there was a very serious worry that there could be a repetition of the events of 1981, but no such repetition occurred. This year the Sea Shepherd Group are again camping on Inishkea Island and on Inishkea and the neighbouring islands off the coast of Mayo the seals are going through the pupping season. There are many seal cubs on a number of these islands and the fear has been raised that slaughter of seals might take place again. I felt it appropriate to raise this matter in this House at this stage before such events take place in the hope that the Minister will give an assurance that no such event will be sanctioned by this Government.
Seals are a protected species pursuant to the Wildlife Act, 1976, which could be described as a landmark legislative provision for nature conservation and legislation for which you, a Cheann Comhairle, deserve considerable praise. You took it through this House and through a special committee of this House in your capacity as Minister for Lands. It is important that it be realised that seals are designated a protected species under that legislation and that it is a criminal offence for any person to maim or kill seals. It is a criminal offence for any person to seek to carry out a slaughter of seals on Inishkea or the related islands. I hope that any individuals who may have in mind a repetition of the type of events that took place in 1981 will be made clearly aware of the consequences of their so acting.
There is only one circumstance in which seals can be lawfully killed and that is if the Minister by way of an order made pursuant to the Wildlife Act issues a licence for the culling of seals as a conservation measure. I ask the Minister to confirm to the House this evening that no such licence will be issued this year, that no such culling will take place, and that the Government will not support the carrying out of any such culling.
It is my understanding that at present a survey is being conducted on the island. It was suggested this week in one of our national newspapers that the results of that survey will shortly come to hand and that those results could dictate the Department's attitude as to whether a seal cull is permitted. If the Minister is in a position to give us the results of that survey I ask him to do so today. I ask him also, prior to his Department or himself sanctioning any such cull in this or any future year, to have the results of any such survey published and made available for discussion in this House and that no such culling of seals be sanctioned by his Department without a prior debate in this House.
There can be no real justification for this type of seal culling in any circumstances. To some extent nature takes care of its own position in these areas and the culling or killing of seals simply cannot be justified. It is suggested that a numbers game must be played on these islands whereby if the seal population increases over a particular number a cull would be justified and that if it remains below a particular number it would not be justified. If the Department this year, next year or in some future year seek to permit the slaughter of seals and seal cubs on the basis of such decision making and such a view of the position, I would feel that this House should first be given an opportunity to debate the position and to examine the criteria applied by the Department when they adjudge that for conservation reasons a seal cull is required. I ask the Minister to reassure the House this evening that his Department will not this year sanction a seal cull. Secondly, I ask him to indicate whether he would be agreeable that, if in any future year his Department believe that within the criteria laid down in the legislation there is any justification for a seal cull, then before issuing licences to permit one the matter will be raised in this House for debate and for decision by this House.
Thirdly, I ask the Minister to express the Government's opposition to a repetition this year of the barbaric behaviour that occurred in 1981. The slaughter that took place in 1981 was illegal. It did not take place at the behest of any Minister. It was not sanctioned by the Minister's Department or by any of his predecessors. It is important that this Government are seen to be articulating the need to enforce the provisions of the wildlife legislation, legislation which does not get too much public notice and is not usually debated in this House, that the Government be seen to be in favour of conservation and that they give a moral direction to those people who may see themselves as taking matters into their own hands if the Government announce formally that no seal cull will be sanctioned this year.
I would like the Minister to ensure, through either his Department or the Department of his colleague the Minister for Justice, that the Garda in Mayo will perform locally their functions as allocated to them under the Wildlife Act to ensure that no offences take place under the Act by way of killing or slaughtering of seals on the islands off the Mayo coast. This is a matter of concern to many people. Of concern also is that the State has effectively left the policing of the provisions of the Wildlife Act in this area to the work of a voluntary group or organisation composed of young people. The State should not depend on the vigilance of voluntary groups or private individuals to protect these animals which the Oireachtas have already designated as protected species.
I would like a more active involvement by the Minister's Department in this area, in particular in ensuring proper nature conservation and proper protection of seals. Young people in the Sea Shepherd group are living in the most atrocious conditions and have found themselves on boats in the Atlantic Ocean at a time of year when it was very dangerous to be engaged in such activities. I am anxious to ensure that this group do not feel that they have to camp on these islands every year as the only means of ensuring that the seals there will not be slaughtered. There is a legislative mechanism in existence to permit the Minister's Department to have a protective function. Under section 15 of the Wildlife Act, 1976, the Minister has power to designate an appropriate area as a nature reserve, which then confers power on the wild life service within his own Department to ensure that wild life and animals in that area are fully and properly protected. It affords the Minister greater powers than he normally has.
I ask the Minister seriously to consider designating Iniskea and the neighbouring islands, which are used annually by seals for breeding purposes, as a nature reserve. That would be seen as an innovative and constructive way of tackling the problems which we must tackle and which have arisen annually since 1981. This problem must not arise next year or in future years.
I ask the Minister to ensure that seals in particular, but other protected species of animals under the Wildlife Act which includes a number of animals such as dolphins, are adequately protected. When that Bill was introduced into the House in 1977 by the present Ceann Comhairle he described it as a charter for wild life preservation. There is a need to generate support for nature conservation and wild life values and to ensure that our legislation in that regard is brought up to date and provides the protection which it is meant to provide.
One of the difficulties in relation to this Act in the context of the worries expressed about the Iniskea island seals is that while killing seals is designated as a criminal offence, the penalty imposed on people who slaughter seals or any other protected species is now out of date. It is not a deterrent against a repetition of the behaviour which occurred in 1981. If any individuals or group seek to land on this island and slaughter these animals they would be liable, by way of indictment if criminally charged, to a fine of £500 and if taken to a District Court on a summary basis, to a fine of £250. Those penalties are out of date and irrelevant and provide no real deterrent and should be reviewed very rapidly. This is important for ensuring not merely that the law is obeyed and that there is not repetition of the killing of the seals on these islands in the future but that anyone who decides to take the law into his own hands will face very serious penalties and sanctions. I suggest that the option of a fine updated from £500 in 1976 to a more realistic £5,000 today be available. There should also be the possibility of a sanction of imprisonment. I would like that type of sanction introduced in amending legislation dealing with wild life matters.
I again thank the Chair for giving me an opportunity to raise this matter and the Minister for coming into the House to deal with it. I hope that the Minister can give me the assurances for which I have asked and I know that a great many in this country are anxious that those assurances be given. A great many young people are particularly concerned about this issue. The Government should be seen to be unambiguous in their condemnation of the barbaric killings which took place in 1981 and should be seen to state clearly that this year under no circumstances will they sanction a seal cull, or the slaughtering of seals. It should be stated precisely and clearly in a way which cannot be misunderstood in any way that the Government would totally deplore a repetition of the events which took place in 1981.
I ask the Minister seriously to consider designating these islands as a nature reserve to afford his Department greater powers in this area. I know that it could not be done this evening, but the Minister should consider examining the Wildlife Act——
For the record, I must state that it is not in order to advocate legislation in an Adjournment debate.
Could I just ask the Minister to consider looking at this legislation with a view to updating it?
Firstly, I apologise for coming late into the House. I thank Deputy Shatter for giving me this opportunity, firstly, of allaying fears and, secondly, of putting the record straight. A picture has been painted in recent times of a group of people who have confronted the dangers of the elements on the north-west Mayo coast and have taken up residence temporarily on Inishkea island to defend grey seals from barbarians from the mainland. These people must feel very disappointed because the reasons for which they went there — which have been much publicised — were to defend against what they regarded as an inevitable attack by people whom they would class as barbarians. At no time in 1983 has there been any suggestion that an illegal cull, or killing — if you want to call a spade a spade — was contemplated by the local fishermen in that area. In fact, these people have been consulted by my Department and have co-operated fully in establishing the facts in relation to the local seal population. The people camping on the island, in somewhat deprived circumstances I am sure, were not invited in there and came in at a time when there was no danger whatever of an illegal killing of seals being carried out there. At the time when they arrived, the very people whom they regarded as barbarians were having consulations with my Department to ensure that the proper legal approach would be applied in establishing the number of seals. Today, representatives of the fishermen on the mainland are participating in that survey which we hope will be completed either today or within the next few days and will establish what the position is. Having done that there is a fair degree of paper work to be done and calculations to be made to find out exactly what the survey throws up in relation to numbers. It is a numbers game.
Under section 42 of the Act a fisherman whose nets or catches are being damaged by marauding seals has the right to apply for a licence to carry out an official cull. Seals are of a territorial nature. That means they defend their own territory against "blow-ins," for the want of a better word. Marauding seals are few and far between. They do not attack or eat fish in the way people think they do. Being territorial by nature they will defend their territory against other seals.
If fish and catches are being damaged — and they have been to a degree and in some cases to a fairly substantial degree, especially during the salmon season — under the Act fishermen have rights. There is nothing wrong, illegal or barbaric about a fisherman seeking a licence if the Department feel he should be given a licence. In the past seven licences of this type have been granted.
This has become a very emotive subject. People's emotions seem to cover the real facts. As Minister for Fisheries living a fair distance from Inishkea but in the county, I assert that not once have I been approached this year about any problem with seals. I have been assured by the fishermen that they have no intention whatever of acting in a way which would be in breach of the Act.
In 1980 a survey was carried out and in 1982 a further survey showed that the pup population on Inishkea had dropped by 50 per cent. The current survey is going ahead. I am not in a position to give Deputy Shatter the details. I hope the fieldwork will be completed today and after that the normal calculations have to be worked out to put on paper the results of the survey. If it transpired that the number of seals in the location was such that it was felt that an official cull was necessary, it would be too late this year to carry out such a cull.
I suggest to the group on the island that, if they have anything better to do, they should go back home. The people against whom they are defending the seals are reasonable people who have no intention of carrying out an illegal cull. They are co-operating fully with my officials in ascertaining exactly what the position is on the ground in Inishkea.
The Deputy asked whether a decision to carry out a cull under the Act would be discussed in this House, and asked that it should be. I cannot tell what the position might be, but under the current legislation I have the right to make these decisions based on scientific data without reference to the House. I am as much against illegal killing of defenceless animals as he is. There is a certain emotive aspect attached to pup seals. Anybody who has read the papers in the past few weeks will realise that. The allegations that this group of people are down there confronting savages from the mainland out to slaughter young seals are totally and absolutely without foundation and untrue. There has been no attempt as far as I know — and I would know of it — by anybody on the mainland to kill pups this season.
When details of the survey become available in the next number of weeks I will inform Deputy Shatter. It may very well be that the details may be published. I will decide on that when the time comes but, as Deputy Shatter has raised the matter in the House, I have no objection to showing him the results of the survey when they come to hand.
The House can be assured that the Department will act within the Act and act responsibly in the conservation of the seal population. We have the co-operation of the fishermen in the area. Any provocative emotive statements made about the activities of the fishermen, which have been exemplary this year, might have the opposite affect to what we are trying to do.
I compliment the leaders of the fishermen's group in the area who are under pressure but who have kept under control the more vociferous members of the group, have taken on the role of conservationists and are co-operating fully with us. As of now, there is no problem. Despite severe provocation, these people have acted in an exemplary fashion.
I should like to thank Deputy Shatter for giving me the opportunity to raise these matters. He, and the House, can be assured that I will act in consultation with my officials within the Act and in a responsible manner. I have no wish to provoke any dissent or dissention among the people directly involved. We have the co-operation of the fishermen and we should maintain and sustain it in any way we can. That is my job.
The Dáil adjourned at 5.30 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. on Tuesday, 8 November 1983.