Vol. 422 No. 1
8 Mr. Byrne asked the Minister for the Marine if he will outline the information available to his Department on the prospects for sea trout in western rivers and lakes this year, in the light of the reported continuing decline in stocks and the importance of this aspect of angling for tourism in the area; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
23 Mr. T. O'Sullivan asked the Minister for the Marine if he intends to bring in international experts to examine, review and assess all the information available in order to analyse the serious problem of sea lice affecting sea trout; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
34 Mrs. Barnes asked the Minister for the Marine if, in view of conflicting reports and conclusions regarding the declining sea trout stocks, he will organise an independent assessment by calling on a number of international experts to review the information available.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 8, 23 and 34 together. I would refer the House to the reply given by the Minister for the Marine, Dr. Woods, on 23 June on this matter.
In the areas covered by the conservation by-laws made by the Minister recently I would have to say that there is little prospect of worthwhile fishing for sea trout being possible this year. However, in large areas of the western seaboard covering counties Kerry, north Mayo and Donegal, good catches of sea trout continue to be made and prospects are quite good.
The question of obtaining an objective viewpoint on the problem of the decline of sea trout in the west has already been dealt with through my Department's initiative in setting up a scientific working group, separate from the Sea Trout Action Group (STAG), to examine the issues. While the programme planning, implementation and evaluation carried out by the scientific working group were all independent of STAG's operation, care was taken to include all the scientists working on the sea trout problem in Ireland — including those funded by STAG — in the membership of this scientific working group.
The report of this working group, which was issued last December, therefore represents a synthesis of the informed scientific views on this problem, and represents as objective a view as can be obtained. I do not therefore consider it necessary or desirable to bring in a foreign expert to overlay the scientific information already at my disposal. I would also point out that a working group of the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea which reviewed the available scientific data last summer concluded that the hypothesis that, in all probability, sea lice from fish farms are a major factor in the collapse of sea trout stocks in the west is not justified in the light of that data.
Would the Minister comment on the statistics that have been produced which say that 94 per cent of sea lice in the west originate in salmon cages? We have seen a constant decline in sea trout stocks since 1989 in the Connemara region and this has caused a very serious fall-off in the estimated 5,000 anglers who visit the region each year. Is the Minister satisfied that scientific information supports the idea that sea lice originate within the salmon cages?
As I stated in my reply the scientific working group comprised of scientists from STAG, the Sea Trout Action Group, which is a pressure group, the Department and the Salmon Research Agency, all these scientists were of the opinion, as is the working group of the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea, ICES, that sea lice is not the main reason for the decline in sea trout. However we are anxious to resolve the problem. The Minister in reply to a question tabled by Deputy Deenihan on 23 June, announced a major action plan to combat the problem of declining numbers of sea trout in the west. The programme pinpoints three areas of action but I will not delay the House by repeating this information as it is available in the Official Report of 23 June 1992.
My main objective is to ensure the wellbeing of wild fish stocks and angling tourism which we understand is worth £74 million to our economy each year. However, the salmon farming industry employs 1,100 workers in coastal communities where there are no other sources of employment and that is worth some £30 million to the local economies. I am quite confident that the action plan which was announced by the Minister some time ago and which puts the emphasis on research, management strategy and conservation is the best way to tackle this very complex problem.
I am glad that an action plan has been introduced. I agree with the Minister's last statement on the importance of fish farming as a potential source of employment in some of the areas worst hit by unemployment.
Allegations are constantly being made against fish farming, particularly salmon farming, that sea lice originating in the salmon cages wipe out sea trout. I think it is very important to have these allegations cleared up and the sooner this is done, the better for the development of both types of fishing, because it is causing great difficulty for fish farming at present.
I certainly agree with Deputy Barnes that it is absolutely essential to clear up this matter as quickly as possible to allow both industries to develop independently of each other as both are vitally important to the country, particularly in the west. The present perception about fish farming does not lead to good relationships. Now that the Minister has undertaken this initiative we have an opportunity to reach some conclusion and resolve the problem as quickly as possible.
The Minister acknowledges that this is a very serious problem affecting many people including the tourism industry. There appears to be a reluctance to employ foreign experts to look at this problem, even though the two scientific groups appear to hold contradictory views. Will the Minister reconsider employing foreign experts to give us their verdict on the cause of sea lice in trout? Our wild trout are too important a resource to lose by not resolving this problem.
I cannot agree with Deputy O'Sullivan's point that the two groups of scientists hold contradictory views. The scientists employed by the Sea Trout Action Group participated in the scientific working group which also comprised scientists from the Department and from the Salmon Research Agency. I also pointed out that a working group of the Internationl Council for the Exploration of the Sea reviewed the available scientific data. I can appreciate that all they could do was review the scientific data made available to them but we must accept the integrity and independence of our scientists. Our scientists are as good as scientists from anywhere else and I certainly value their judgment and opinions. I do not think engaging foreign experts would assist us in any way but would entail awaiting further reports. We have all the information necessary now and the Minister has taken the initiative. As Deputy Barnes pointed out, we should not waste any time and I shall certainly do my utmost in the Department to ensure that action is taken as quickly as possible.
I put it to the Minister that there is not much point in having a development plan for sea trout until we find out the cause for the decline — the collapse — of the sea trout numbers in the west. Three years after the decline was signalled clearly the Department of the Marine still do not know what the answer is. That is ridiculous. I could tell the Minister what the answer is: it is the presence of fish farms; nothing more and nothing less. Is the Minister aware of the considerable use of Invomectin, an illegal chemical, in the control of sea lice? Does he realise that this could result in very serious problems for the people who eat farmed salmon if it gets into the food chain?
I know that all experts differ, and Deputy Garland differs from all of the scientists. As I have said, I value their judgments and recommendations and I must accept them. I suggest that we await the initiative taken by the Minister and which he announced recently. The initiative pinpoints three areas of action of which I am sure the Deputy is aware. If the Deputy does not have that information, it is available in the Official Report in reply to a question tabled on 23 June. I am not aware of the matter referred to by the Deputy. No doubt, he will be anxious to provide the Department with the necessary information and we shall certainly take a particular interest in it.
