Vol. 381 No. 6
asked the Minister for the Marine the total number of incidents of pollution of rivers and lakes notified to his Department during the past 12 months; the number of incidents which resulted in fish kills; the total estimated number of fish killed as a result of these incidents and the estimated cost of restocking; if he has satisfied himself that existing anti-pollution measures and penalties for offences are adequate; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
52.
asked the Minister for the Marine if he will tabulate the fish kills to date this year; the contribution which the task force on pollution will make towards resolving the fish kills; and his views on whether inland fisheries and anglers are anticipating a bad summer in relation to fish kills.
53.
asked the Minister for the Marine the amount of money which has been spent in the restocking of our rivers pursuant to the fish kills of 1987; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I propose to take oral Question No. 32 and written Questions Nos. 52 and 53 together.
Based on the most recent information received from the regional fisheries boards, the total number of incidents of pollution of rivers and lakes resulting in fish kills notified to my Department during 1987 were 114 and five have been notified to date in 1988. The vast bulk of fish kills occur during summer months. The number of fish killed is not available. The cost of restocking as a result of these incidents is therefore not available. The regional fisheries boards carry out restocking as part of their general restocking programmes and restocking is also carried out by private groups. It is difficult to accurately assess the costs incurred arising specifically from fish kills. It is estimated, however, that about £11,000 was incurred in 1987 and £40,000 to date in 1988.
Following the spate of fish kills last summer, I decided that legislation should be introduced to substantially increase the penalties for pollution offences under the Fisheries Acts and to provide that the polluter pays. My Colleague, the Minister for the Environment, decided that similar changes should be made in the Local Government (Water Pollution) Act, 1977, and he is now introducing legislation to amend both the Fisheries Acts and the Local Government (Water Pollution) Act, 1977. The primary responsibility for water pollution control rests with the Minister for the Environment under the latter Act. The fisheries boards have an independent role and function in the matter.
Last summer the Government set up a Cabinet committee under the chairmanship of the Minister for the Environment to undertake a review of water pollution control. The committee's recommendations which involve a comprehensive and integrated programme to combat water pollution control have been adopted by the Government. I am making copies of the press release setting out full details of these measures including the role of the task forces available to the Deputies concerned. The regional fisheries boards are playing an active role in these task forces. While I cannot say what anglers or others may be anticipating this summer, the position in relation to pollution of our inland waterways was let deteriorate over the period 1983-87. It is a difficult task to rectify the situation but the measures being taken by this Government should help to reverse the decline and improve the situation.
I can say that the measures taken by the Government to deal with this problem have ensured that we are in a better position to combat pollution this summer.
