While the official report of the proceedings of the meeting of the Joint Committee on European Affairs on 8 December 1995 is not yet available, I have received a copy of the presentation made by the National Association of Regional Game Councils (NARGC) to the joint committee. I subsequently met the joint committee on 20 February 1996 to discuss the matters raised by the NARGC and related issues and have arranged for a copy of my presentation to the committee to be forwarded to the Deputy.
My primary responsibility under the Wildlife Act, 1976, is for the conservation of wildlife, including migratory species of wild birds which are also of interest to the NARGC. Both the NARGC and I agree that controlled or sustainable hunting does not pose a threat to such species of wild birds. This is the concept of "wise use" or "sustainable yield" whereby the yield taken from the population through hunting on an annual basis does not compromise the survival of the population. The conservation requirements of the species are met through the provision of a limited hunting season under section 24 of the 1976 Act. This restricts the hunting of the species by resident and foreign hunter alike.
The draft heads of a Bill to amend the Wildlife Act, 1976, are currently in preparation in my Department. Provision is being made for additional measures for the control of tourist shooting by introducing regulations for the licensing of game shoot promoters. The role of gillies will be addressed in this context.
The NARGC's submission to the joint committee makes a number of references to tourists shooting non-huntable species and to trespassing. I have no doubt that some tourists breach our laws and, indeed, so do a small minority of resident hunters. However, the extent of abuse by tourists is, I feel, exaggerated and is not supported by good evidence. When there is sufficient evidence to sustain a prosecution, rest assured that my Department will pursue the matter. The NARGC, through its regional game councils as recognised bodies under the wildlife code, has a role to play here in that they can prosecute proceedings for certain breaches of the 1976 Act. It is essential that evidence be supplied in good time so that a summons can be served before the offender leaves the jurisdiction.
There is no evidence that migratory species are under threat due to the activities of continental tourist shooters. So long as such shooting is sustainable, I see no reason why it should not continue. I am conscious that the system of control needs further regulation and, as I mentioned earlier, I intend to address that matter in the proposed amendments to the Wildlife Act, 1976. I propose to introduce the amending Bill later this year.