Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 26 Feb 1992

Vol. 416 No. 3

Written Answers. - Sea Trout Stocks Destruction.

Tomás MacGiolla

Question:

26 Tomás Mac Giolla asked the Minister for the Marine if he will outline his views on the claims made by the Sea Trout Action Group at a press conference on 18 February that stocks of sea trout in the west of Ireland were being destroyed by grossly abnormal and unnatural levels of sea lice coming from coastal salmon farms; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

Minister for the Marine (Dr. Woods)

I have received the latest report of the Sea Trout Action Group which is one of three recent reports on the issue of the sea trout collapse currently before me, the other two being the report of the Irish Salmon Growers' Association on Sea Trout Problems and Research, and the report of the Sea Trout Working Group on the results of the 1991 research programme.

There are differing perceptions as to the cause of the sea trout problem and the last two years have seen a concerted research effort to test the various hypotheses which have been advanced to explain the decline in numbers. The results of the 1991 research effort, which my Department had a key role in funding and organising, were evaluated by a working group set up under the aegis of the Department on which all the scientists involved in the research programme participated. The working group concluded, on the basis of the scientific evidence to date, that it has not been possible to demonstrate a significant correlation between the production of lice from salmon farms and subsequent infestation of sea trout in specific bays.

The Sea Trout Action Group report goes further than this in stating that Sea Trout Action Group now believe that the weight of available evidence indicates that the increase in the number of lice emanating from salmon farms was a major contributory factor in the sea trout collapse.

The Irish Salmon Growers' Association for their part have stated in their review document that the available scientific information does not support the STAG finding and points to the need for further research on environmental and other factors.

There is a clear need for more to be done on this complex problem and it is equally clear that the practical recommendations of all the groups concerned can be examined and taken forward without necessarily accepting any hypothesis as definitive. And this is precisely the approach I am going to take.

The working group have made a number of recommendations on the scope and direction of the 1992 research programme. These proposals are being assessed by my Department.

Together with determining the research priorities for this year, my Department are examining the recommendations of the Sea Trout Action Group with a view to advising me of the management steps which might now be necessary to enhance the measures put in place in 1991.

In this regard, my Department, having met with representatives of STAG, will be continuing the current round of discussions with the Irish Salmon Growers Association who have made a series of constructive management proposals, and other interested parties with a view to adopting an effective balanced framework for the conservation and rehabilitation of sea trout populations.

I will conclude by stressing the need for the work on this complex problem to go forward in a continued spirit of co-operation. It is in the interest of all concerned that the cause of this problem is identified and tackled. Differing perceptions as to the cause of the problem should not stand in the way of concerted action to eliminate it.