Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 2 Dec 1997

Vol. 483 No. 6

Regional Fisheries Boards: Motion.

Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources (Dr. Woods)

I move:

That Dáil Éireann approves the following Order in draft:

Regional Fisheries Boards (Postponement of Elections) Order, 1997

a copy of which Order in draft was laid before Dáil Éireann on 26 November 1997."

I welcome this opportunity to explain to the House my reasons for postponing elections of members to the regional fisheries boards for one year. These elections were due to take place on 16 December next. Under the Fisheries (Amendment) Act, 1991, elections to the management committees of the trout and coarse fisheries development societies take place at the same time as the elections to the regional boards. As a consequence of this Order, these elections will also be postponed for one year. My reason for this decision is to allow me to complete a comprehensive review of the structures, services and organisation of the inland fisheries sector. I will elaborate on my thinking in this regard later.

The seven regional fisheries boards have statutory responsibilities under the Fisheries Act, 1980 on the management, conservation, protection, development and improvement of the fisheries within their regions and offshore to the 12 mile limit for the protection of salmon. The boards also enforce various legislative provisions on water pollution as it affects fish stocks and have an input, at planning stage, in proposed developments which could impact on fish stocks or habitats. They promote and develop game, coarse fish and sea angling. Each board has between 20 and 23 members, seven of whom are appointed by the Minister. The remaining members are elected from panels representing the main fishery interests, including fishery owners, commercial fishermen and salmon, trout, coarse and sea anglers. The seven regional boards have a total of 265 permanent staff.

The regional fisheries boards are funded largely by the Exchequer and the European Union from the Department's Vote administered through the Central Fisheries Board. In addition, the regional boards generate their own resources, notably through fisheries rates, licence duties, fines and forfeitures. Expenditure in 1997 by the central and regional fisheries boards will be of the order of £14 million. The estimate for 1998 is £14.9 million.

The Central Fisheries Board is made up of the chairpersons of the seven regional boards and six ministerial appointees. There are no elections to the central board. The trout and coarse fisheries development societies, which were set up in 1991 under the Fisheries (Amendment) Act, 1991 participate in the development of trout and coarse fisheries by raising funds through the issue of share certificates and making grants or payments available for appropriate development works. Each society has a management committee comprising seven members, five elected by the members and two nominated by the Minister. The balance of angling interests, whether trout or coarse, on each society is determined by the extent of the particular angling interest in a region.

Elections to the regional fisheries boards were last held in December 1992. Members elected and nominated at that time, with subsequent nominees arising from vacancies in the interim, serve under the Act until the declaration of the next election results. In accordance with regulations made under the Fisheries Act, 1980, elections to the regional fisheries boards would fall due to be held this year on the third Tuesday in December, 16 December. Section 15 of the 1980 Act enables me to postpone by Order for a specified period of time the elections to the boards. Before making such an Order a resolution approving of the draft must be passed by both Houses of the Oireachtas. It is on this statutory basis that I approach the House today.

Inland fisheries is one of our greatest self-sustaining natural resources. Angling opportunities in Ireland compare very favourably with the best in the world and this is reflected in the growing demand for the product. The quality of our Atlantic salmon and wild trout fisheries is unsurpassed. We have extensive and excellent coarse fisheries with a wide range of species. The rich fishing grounds off our coasts provide high quality and varied opportunities for the sea angler.

The central and regional fisheries boards have done exceptional work since their inception in 1980 in managing and developing this valuable resource. I pay tribute to all the board members, both past and present, as well as management and staff for their committed contribution over the years.

I believe that we have collectively reached a point after almost 20 years where it is timely and appropriate to review and reflect on the future needs of and direction for the boards. My primary objective in this regard is to support and facilitate the boards in delivery on their mandate as efficiently and effectively as possible and to plan the way forward for the boards into the new century.

With this in mind I recently announced my intention to review comprehensively the structures, services and organisation of the inland fisheries sector with a view to implementing the necessary degree of change, both legislative and organisational, to deliver on the Government's strategic objectives for the inland fisheries resource. The primary objective is to ensure effective and efficient delivery of service and best deployment of human and financial resources, combined with a catchment management approach for the conservation, management and development of the fisheries at regional and local level.

Greater clarity in the respective roles of the Department, the Central Fisheries Board and the regional fisheries boards is a key consideration. I believe it would be sensible and prudent to postpone elections to the regional boards for one year to allow for full consideration of all the issues involved in delivering the necessary degree of strategic change and, most importantly, to provide continuity during this process.

Immediately on coming into office I asked the Central Fisheries Board as a matter of priority to draw up a strategic plan which would take a critical look forward at management, development and conservation objectives of our inland fisheries resources over a five-year period. I am pleased to announce that the board has responded with admirable speed and presented me yesterday with its development plan for 1998-2002 entitled "Achieving Sustainable Growth." I have arranged for copies of this report to be left with the spokespersons of each party. I presume all Members received them yesterday. Has Deputy Stagg a copy of the report?

Mr. Stagg

Yes and I have read the report.

Mr. Kenny

Other interested parties may not have received it yet.

Dr. Woods

I congratulate the central and regional fisheries boards, their staff and all involved in the formulation of the plan. Deputies will agree that this is a good report with a clear outline of future plans.

This plan represents a welcome consensus among the boards and fisheries interests on the way forward for developing inland fisheries. It underlines the importance and benefits of consultation and participation by all stakeholders in the process. It sets an ambitious agenda for the boards in terms of conservation and development objectives for the resource; more effective delivery of services; and the need to address the management and organisational challenges inherent in delivering on those strategic objectives.

In particular, I welcome the plan's recognition of, and commitment to, improved deployment of the considerable human and financial resources devoted to inland fisheries. The board's plan is also timely and appropriate for a number of reasons. It reflects and commits the board to the principles governing the ongoing process of strategic change in the public service. The Government is committed to delivering fundamental reform in the management and delivery of services by Departments and, by extension, associated agencies. This is a process to which the previous Government was also committed. The plan puts a welcome focus on service delivery, resource deployment and management systems. It sets important organisational goals for customer service, financial management systems and human resource strategies across the inland fisheries service. Key principles of value for money, efficiency and effectiveness and customer service are well reflected in the objectives set by the board. I welcome and endorse that strategic approach.

In addition to the organisational challenges, the plan sets out a number of key objectives for the development, conservation and protection of our fisheries. I particularly welcome the emphasis given to maximising jobs and economic activity through further targeted development of game, coarse and sea angling. In this regard, the plan reflects the targets already set in relation to the tourism angling measure for growing the tourism angling product and to increasing angler numbers and revenues through focused investment and sustained overseas marketing.

Members will be aware that, as a priority, we intend to tackle the overseas marketing issue. It has been decided to transfer £300,000 from the tourism angling measure to a tourism marketing fund to promote angling market research and promotion overseas. My Department is working closely with the Department of Tourism, Sport and Recreation, the central and regional fisheries boards and all relevant agencies to ensure the success of this important initiative.

The board's plan also sets a number of key objectives in relation to environmental and water quality issues as they impact on the fisheries resource. I welcome the board's commitment to deliver on the water quality action plan which I announced last August. In the face of the many serious threats to fish stocks and habitats, it is essential that we deliver the necessary co-ordinated national effort to prevent water pollution; tackle the causes of pollution; and move swiftly when pollution incidents occur.

The continued sustainable development of our inland fisheries resource critically depends on maintaining and securing the highest standards of water quality in fishery catchments. I have already announced my intention to implement a national catchment management strategy and I have tasked the boards with the development of six pilot projects as part of that process. I welcome the plan's commitment to deliver on this objective. The catchment management approach will ensure better ownership of development and conservation strategies among our people at regional and local community level. It will involve and empower anglers and all the players in maximising the potential of the local fisheries resource. I look forward to working with the boards in delivering this initiative.

Decisions on future strategic directions for inland fisheries will be fully informed by the board's plan. My thinking will also be informed by the recent helpful report of the Comptroller and Auditor General on the management of inland fisheries, the salmon management task force's report and successive consultancy reports into the organisation and management of the inland fisheries sector.

As I indicated, elections to the fisheries development societies will be postponed and I outlined the importance of the fisheries development societies.

We all share a common objective to manage, conserve and develop the uniquely valuable inland fisheries resource to best effect. The Central Fisheries Board and the regional fisheries boards are pivotal in the delivery of that objective and have set out a clear strategic view of future priorities and directions in their new five year plan. My intention in carrying out this review is to strongly position the boards, both organisationally and statutorily, to deliver on that challenging agenda for change beyond 2000. A catchment based approach to conservation and development combined with best management practice, service delivery and resource deployment is the key to delivering on that agenda. I look forward to working with the boards and with all the interested parties to deliver the necessary strategic change. Postponement of the election will provide a prudent degree of continuity for 12 months as we undertake this process.

I will bring my proposals to Government as early as possible in the new year. I am confident these will deliver the necessary framework for the Central Fisheries Board and the regional fisheries boards to deliver on the challenges ahead. In these circumstances, I ask the House to pass this resolution approving the terms of the draft order.

Mr. Finucane

I welcome this resolution. Last August I received a letter from a member of a regional fisheries board which stated that the Central Fisheries Board had the worst record of any organisation when it came to answering mail. He said he could not recall receiving an acknowledgement of a letter let alone an answer, although information was sought on many occasions. Although the Central Fisheries Board is capable of producing a glossy tome such as the one I received, it must change its structures and procedures.

I agree with the decision of the Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources to defer the appointment of members of the regional fisheries boards for another year. It is a correct decision taken in the context of a comprehensive review of the central fisheries services. It is time the operation of the Central Fisheries Board and the regional fisheries boards was reviewed and changes made.

A consultant's report commissioned in 1994 cost almost £65,000. Although many recommendations were made, no change took place. This report was not accepted by the Central Fisheries Board and the regional fisheries boards disassociated themselves from it. A further consultant's report by Price Waterhouse in 1996 reviewed the organisation and management structure of the fisheries services and of the inland fisheries area and further recommendations were made. It is now time to implement the recommendations of both reports in order to realign the roles of the Central Fisheries Board and the regional fisheries boards.

The Central Fisheries Board consists of 13 members, seven of whom are chairpersons of the regional fisheries boards; the other six members are appointed by the Minister. The regional fisheries boards have between 20 and 23 members, seven of whom are appointed by the Minister. There is a necessity for the redefinition of the roles of both the Central Fisheries Board and the regional fisheries boards. When one considers the chairpersons of the regional boards are members of the Central Fisheries Board and they are in the majority, surely this raises important questions as to whether decisions, which should be taken in the national interest, can be blurred if regional and local interests prevail.

There is also a strong criticism of the composition of the regional fisheries boards and there is a necessity to have bodies, such as those related to tourism, and local authorities involved and to look at whether the current composition is representative of all the fishing interests who use this natural resource. As a member of a local authority, I am aware that most local authorities spend a great deal of money on enforcement to combat pollution. All the reports state that there is an overlap in the duties of local authorities and the regional fisheries boards. That area needs to be looked at and it is very important that local authorities are represented on such boards.

It is also obvious that the Central Fisheries Board needs to change in order to have a sharper focus and have representative knowledgeable personnel from the inland fisheries areas. I am sure the Minister would agree that the Central Fisheries Board does not necessarily act in the interests of inland fisheries.

The Central Fisheries Board is a statutory body established under the Fisheries Act, 1980. It is a harsh criticism of the board that although there is a legal obligation on it to produce a five-year development plan, it has never produced a plan of this nature. Now, 17 years later, at long last it has done so. The Minister stated that this five-year plan was produced with admirable speed and I must compliment him on that, but we waited nearly 17 years for something concrete like this to develop.

Mr. Stagg

Conversion before Deputies.

Mr. Finucane

I trust that, as a result of this plan, they will now reappraise the operation of the Central Fisheries Board and the regional boards to improve their clarity, the definition of roles and the overall performance. Much work has gone into the report of the Central Fisheries Board but I am sure the Minister will agree that it will not succeed unless many fundamental changes take place.

It is in the role of marketing angling overseas that there is a necessity for great change. As there is a recognition that there is a great weakness in this area, Bord Fáilte no longer has a lead role in it. The recent decision to transfer £300,000 from the tourism angling measure to a tourism marketing fund to promote angling market research and promotion overseas must be welcomed. There is an urgent necessity to provide the necessary resources for this important area.

It is interesting to note when the Central Fisheries Board established a special unit to manage the tourism angling measures, and committees were established to appraise and approve the various projects, that there were no private sector or business interests on these committees. I do not agree with that because the people who are at the coalface deserve to be members of such committees.

Over 152,000 overseas anglers came to Ireland in 1995 and generated revenue of £52 million. There are 190,000 domestic anglers who spent an estimated £27 million in 1996. Undoubtedly, the potential in this area could be enhanced considerably by an improved marketing strategy.

The salmon management task force, which reported during the period of office of my colleague, the previous Minister, Deputy Barrett, recommended many initiatives as there was great concern about the depletion of wild salmon stocks. There is an urgent need to be able to fully assess and quantify salmon and sea stocks. I therefore welcome the current operation of ten fish counters in Irish waters and also welcome the Minister's decision to install at least another 14 counters in the next two years. Fish counters are an important management tool in quantifying and monitoring salmon and sea trout stocks and spawning targets, which can assist in conservation and development strategies. I trust that further fish counters beyond these 24 will be installed so that all our key catchment systems are covered.

Another key recommendation in the salmon management task force report was the establishment of catchment area committees. The intention was that local fisheries and angling, tourism, industry and farming interests would plan a comprehensive strategy for the catchment areas, to include fishing activities, pollution prevention, water quality, the protection of fishing life, etc. That is a positive step and was one of the key recommendations of the salmon management task force. I trust the composition of those committees will reflect the interested parties.

I welcome the Minister's recent decision to start with six pilot fisheries catchment projects across the country, one of which will be on the Mulcaire river in Limerick. I trust this will proceed promptly and that the results will be evaluated and the scheme extended as appropriate. The Minister recognises the necessity to revamp all inland fisheries activity. I acknowledge the dedicated approach of the staff who often operate in difficult circumstances, particularly those working for regional fisheries boards. It is also a matter of urgency to improve and redefine the inland fisheries area.

Mr. Stagg

I declare an interest; I am an anxious angler who spends his limited spare time fishing, except during the rod licence dispute.

Mr. Kenny

The Deputy is a successful angler, noted in the local papers in the west.

Mr. Stagg

I am aware of the Coopers & Lybrand and Price Waterhouse consultants' reports on inland fisheries and the Comptroller and Auditor General's value for money report, published recently. These reports identified the need which the board accepts for changes in structures, clear policy positions and direction, legislation to give legal forces to those positions and structures, a one stop shop for water quality, a localised catchment management strategy to fit into the overall policy, and a new, effective marketing strategy. I congratulate the Minister on taking the initiative to delay the appointment of new boards to give a breathing space for the required consultation.

I record my appreciation for the record of achievement of the existing boards. Despite not having a plan such as was outlined yesterday by the Central Fisheries Board, the work of the regional fisheries boards, particularly those with which I am most familiar in the west and northwest, has been substantial. The north-western board has developed not only traditional game fishing but coarse fishing also. It is widely recognised that this is a time for change and it is timely that the Minister is acting at this stage because of the reports and plan which have come to hand.

The Minister is aware of the high value placed on free fisheries in most lakes and rivers. This is particularly true of trout and coarse fisheries but also of long stretches of salmon rivers where the State, through the fisheries boards or the Land Commission, hold the riparian rights. He is also aware of the lengths to which anglers and boatmen are prepared to go to secure these free fishing rights. He will be mindful of the rod licence dispute which halted angling and angling tourism for over two years in the last decade. I am sure he knows that those involved in the angling industry were prepared to suffer huge financial loss in defence of their free fishing at that time. Boatmen, bed and breakfast operators, hotels and fishery owners suffered during that period, as did tourism in general. The Minister will also know that free fisheries are a major marketing tool in attracting valuable Irish and overseas angling tourists.

The resolve shown during the rod angling dispute has not gone away. If anything, it is strengthened by the defeat of the rod licence regime. In recent weeks, somebody in the Minister's Department or the Central Fisheries Board, or both, decided to restart the rod licence war. This time they decided to go much further than the rod licence proposal. They have now selected the first batch of free fisheries, the thin end of the wedge, which they have offered for sale to the highest bidder.

The successful bidder, native or from overseas — all EU citizens are entitled to bid — will then charge a rod licence to all and sundry who wish to fish there, whether they are local youngsters or German visitors. The higher the bid, the more likely the bidder is to succeed and the higher the resultant licence fee will be. Will locals be priced out of the market, not only for the fishing titles but for the right to fish in their local rivers? Who are the likely new landlords of our now free fisheries? Will they be German industrialists or French and Dutch entrepreneurs, or will the English gentry have an opportunity to make a comeback and recover the fisheries if their cheque books are large enough? EU law, as the Minister is aware, requires that the highest bidder be allowed buy State assets which are for sale.

This is madness. It will be strongly resisted and will not work. I am telling the Minister today, which is the first time this has been discussed, that he will not be able to say he was not warned about it. I will give him the example of the small River Robe in Mayo.

I was first taught to fish for trout on the River Robe by my late grandfather, John Vahey. I am sure he never thought he would be mentioned in a House of Parliament. He had worked as a gamekeeper on that river when the local landlord owned the waters and lands. He was extremely happy that the landlord was no more — he used say "good riddance to bad rubbish"— that the jackdaws had taken over the ruins of the "Big House" and that the land had been allocated to locals. He was particularly happy that he and his grandson could fish the river unrestricted, not as poachers but as Irishmen with the right to so do. I have regularly fished on the River Robe since then, except during the rod licence dispute, and I intend to continue this happy practice.

In case the Minister thinks I am inventing this proposal I have a copy of the tender document to sell the fishing rights on a list of rivers. The proposal to sell the fishing rights on the River Robe would mean that I would require 12 separate licences from the new landlords to fish there. It is not one of the great rivers; it runs from Claremorris to Lough Mask, which is about 15 miles. I would need a licence for almost every mile and a half of the river.

If the River Robe is to be butchered and sold piecemeal, what will happen when they sell the big rivers and the great midland and western lakes? I have no doubt, having discussed this matter with officials in the Department and the Central Fisheries Board, that is their intention. The Minister, as the political head of the Department, will have to carry the can for those actions. If this proposal goes through, anglers will need special bags, not to carry the fish but to carry the special licences they will require.

This proposal is 12 times worse than the rod licence proposal as far as the River Robe in concerned. It will hugely inhibit local anglers and will undoubtedly give rise to poaching. It will open the way to foreign ownership and will discourage overseas anglers. It will be counterproductive and give rise to a dispute that will put the rod licence dispute in the halfpenny place.

Anglers contribute to the quality and maintenance of the fisheries voluntarily and in large measure. Overseas anglers contribute through their spend in the general economy, directly benefiting State coffers. They are valuable, but this proposal could drive them away. Previous speakers have given figures indicating the amounts involved. They are worth £80 million per annum and there is a target in the new plan to bring them up to £150 million per annum. Employment numbers currently amount to 3,700, while there is a target in the new plan for this to increase to 7,000.

Will the Minister order a halt to this crazy and ill-conceived project? As a political colleague I suggest that he should not walk into a minefield with his eyes open. Today we received the strategic development plan for inland fisheries from the Central Fisheries Board. It could not be more up to date. It makes vague references to a commercial focus and a commercial use of sale of consultancy services, such as tidal research, fisheries development and training. There is no mention of selling the hard won fishery rights — the free fisheries. This is a backdoor sale without consultation or agreement.

Will the Minister address this matter in his reply? If I am not satisfied with it my party will not support this motion as a signal that we are not satisfied with this proposal regarding the tendering and sale of free rivers in Ireland. If the sale of fishing rights proceeds, I will join with others in resisting it until it is reversed.

I look forward to the Minister's reply. I hope he will indicate that this madness is halted and that a plan presented to him yesterday indicates that the fisheries boards are jumping the gun by selling fisheries at a point where major replanning and restructuring of the inland fisheries industry is about to take place.

Mr. Kenny

The Minister is in office at a critical time in the development of the marine and fisheries, which has arisen because of increased leisure time, the strength of the economy and the expansion in building. Traditionally isolated areas and facilities are now being used. Because of my experience in the then Department of Tourism and Trade I know the Minister is presiding over an area of enormous economic potential.

I was present when the House debated the rod licence issue during Private Members' Business. It led to one of the most spurious campaigns, with many sides making bad-minded contributions. If the Minister intends to abolish or radically restructure the Central Fisheries Board he should respect Deputy Stagg's advice, as a practising angler on the river Robe, that 12 licences should not be required by anglers to fish the section in question.

In answer to a question on 18 November, the Minister said that arrangements would be made for locals to fish, irrespective of the tender system. However, that does not answer the question at issue here. When the surface is scratched all the traits of old Ireland can be found. I would therefore advise the Minister to proceed with great caution. He is trying to reintroduce something that generations of people fought long and hard to remove.

I pay tribute to the members of the various boards who are genuinely interested in the development of a resource which has enormous potential. When Minister for Tourism and Trade we worked diligently in marketing angling tourism abroad. Many people do not appreciate the extent of the resource we have in Ireland. I had the opportunity of opening the world fly fishing championships in Galway some years ago, the highlight of which concerned an Italian angler who was able to fill his kettle in the middle of Lough Mask from his boat, boil it on one of the islands and have his lunch. In many continental countries which do not have the huge potential and facility we have, anglers have to fish in polluted canals, unused quarries and over-crowded and polluted lakes. The Minister is presiding over the future development of an immense resource and I am sure that, as a doctor of science, he understands this.

The higher spend angling interest, particularly in the United States and in the context of salmon fishing, warrants closer inspection in relation to tourism. There are many high spenders on the east coast of the United States who have an immense interest in angling and who go fishing in salmon rivers in Canada, Argentina and South America. In latter years they have gone to Russia. However, all these areas are isolated and far away and if the fishing is not as good as it should be or the anglers get fed up with the location or the isolation, they want the option of doing something else. Ireland, with its salmon waters and rivers, is an ideal location for marketing to that upper end of the salmon fishing market. The £300,000 additional funding for marketing should be focused on this area and I am sure Bord Fáilte personnel in North America, including Joe Byrne, would be more than willing to give their experience and advice. It has potential to bring in extra money to areas that badly need it.

As Minister for Tourism and Trade I worked with the North-Western Fisheries Board and the Western Fisheries Board in developing angling resources. The North-Western Fisheries Board was the first to develop its plan in 1992 and has been working on it since 1994. I do not understand why the decision of the previous Government regarding the devolution of power to the regional boards was not carried through in the case of the Moy Fisheries. Perhaps the Minister will deal with this issue in his reply. It is ludicrous that a section of water which flows past the headquarters of the regional fisheries board in Ardnaree House is controlled by the Central Fisheries Board. It is not good enough. This is the best salmon fishery in Europe and tremendous work has been carried out over the past number of years in developing it. I ask the Minister to be decisive and firm and to address this matter once and for all. He will be thanked for doing so and will get credit for it. The local economy of an area which has been disadvantaged and deprived for too long will reap the benefit.

The Western Fisheries Board includes Loughs Mask, Corrib and Carra — the great fishing lakes of the west and the finest in the world, three of the 13 wild brown trout fisheries remaining in Europe. I do not know who owns the waters of these lakes. I understand they were bequeathed during the time of Queen Victoria to the Irish people. The Minister for Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht and the Islands, under the powers and functions legislation introduced in the past fortnight, is entitled to take over these waters for the purpose of developing various businesses in which the Office of Public Works might be involved. I would like the Minister to clarify the co-operation that exists between him and the Minister for Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht and the Islands in relation to actions taken under those powers.

Lough Corrib, Lough Mask and Lough Conn are also subject to by-laws which prevent jet skis, sailing, speed and power boats, windsurfers and so on utilising these waters. Such activities are acceptable in the proper locations if carried out to a controlled standard but we cannot allow a situation to develop where the great reservoirs of the west, which currently supply water to hundreds of thousands of people, are overrun.

The Minister must realise the importance of the resource he manages as that is critical to its future development. I support the concept of restructuring the fisheries boards and the Minister is correct to allow himself the breathing space to do that.

Perhaps the Minister, in his reply, would address the issue of the non-appointment of staff to regional boards. In his speech he referred to the boards' mandate to manage, conserve, protect, develop and improve fisheries within their regions up to a 12 mile limit. It is physically impossible for the north-western and western boards to do this as they do not have the necessary resources. There has been a vacancy for an assistant inspector in the Bangor area for a number of years. Will the Minister explain why that vacancy has not been filled? The vast and rugged coastline from Sligo Bay to Leenane is impossible to cover. Inshore fishermen's and half-deckers' nets are being cut by Irish and Spanish trawlers but there is no ability to control this. The Minister could examine the possibility of providing additional resources for the people who try to do their job within the 12 mile limit along the inner sections of the coastline.

The Minister referred to the prevention of water pollution, the necessity to tackle its causes and the importance of moving swiftly when pollution incidents occur. That is critical. The recent Teagasc report indicated that the same return could be elicited from farming activities through the use of far less phosphate fertiliser. The Minister will find that farmers, like anglers, are custodians of the environment and are only too willing to play their part in its development and conservation.

During Fine Gael's term in Government, funding was allocated for tertiary treatment works in Castlebar. These clean the Castlebar river which flows into Lough Cullen which subsequently acts as a filter for Lough Conn and the Moy fisheries basin. These are measures which the Minister should investigate as the prevention of water pollution is a critical issue. Local authorities, sewerage schemes and so on contribute to the development or destruction of an enormous resource.

One of the problems, which may be addressed in part tomorrow, pertains to the seaside resorts scheme. When we introduced the scheme in various areas we intended to include the Shannon corridor and basin. However, many of our smaller towns and villages do not have the necessary infrastructure in place in terms of sewage treatment plants and so on. If there is to be an explosion of investment and consequential economic development, it is necessary to provide parallel facilities to cater for that. That will prevent pollution and avoid a situation where, on the one hand, there is economic expansion but on the other, the resource one is trying to protect is destroyed.

This is a timely intervention and one which I support. The Minister is correct to allow himself the time to restructure and reorganise as this is an enormous international resource, not just a minor facility. As someone who had the opportunity and privilege of dealing in a tourism and trading sense with foreign groups, I realise that Ireland's fishery potential has enormous significance internationally. It is a wonderful pastime and a marvellous resource which we must protect for our children's children.

Regardless of whether the Minister intends to reorganise, restructure or abolish the Central Fisheries Board, I urge him to avoid a course of action that will renew the rod licence war in the west. During that dispute we witnessed a great deal of unseemly behaviour by all sides which continued for a long period of time and I do not wish to see that happen again. An angler should not have to have 12 licences to fish sections of a river which he fished as a child and which his father and grandfather fished before him. I urge the Minister not to take that course.

If the Minister wishes to restructure he must forget about licences. If he wants to examine the management of a waterway, he must talk to local people and the regional fisheries boards. There is a method of realising the development potential of this industry without advertising internationally for tenders for sections of a waterway. I wish the Minister well in his efforts to develop an enormous national resource with great potential.

Mr. Gilmore

I do not usually like the idea of postponing elections. However, in this case there are good grounds for such a decision on the basis of the need to reform the structures in inland fisheries and, hopefully, to establish a new legislative basis for the industry. Postponing elections for a year might enable that to happen.

I am concerned, however, that the commitment given by the Minister in this regard is described as a review. The Minister committed himself to bringing proposals to Government early in the new year but he did not offer a commitment to legislate, which would appear to be necessary.

Dr. Woods

That is what the proposals will be.

Mr. Gilmore

I appreciate that clarification. It is implicit in the postponement of elections that when elections are held they will be held to different or at least reformed bodies.

The inland fisheries resource is hugely underappreciated in some sectors of society and greatly appreciated in others. Large numbers of people participate in inland fisheries either as anglers or as tourism promoters who provide accommodation and other supports for visiting anglers. I welcome the publication yesterday of the Central Fisheries Board's five year plan for the development of inland fisheries. I have not yet been supplied with a copy of the plan but I read a summary of it in today's edition of The Irish Times.

New legislation is required to underpin the development of inland fisheries. The Central Fisheries Board, the regional fisheries boards, the Salmon Research Agency, the Marine Institute and the Department have teams of people, both board members and staff, who are committed to the development of inland fisheries and to working on that development. However, the structures which exist at present were put in place in 1980 to replace what can only be called the inheritance of the 19th century, when the approach to inland fisheries was different from what is necessary today. That approach was based on the assumption that the landlord class owned the fisheries and, as the peasantry was inclined to poach the fish, there was a need to put in place a regime which protected the interests of the owning class. While there may be remnants of that inheritance, the requirements regarding the development of inland fisheries today are quite different. The structures required and the way in which they go about their business need to reflect that reality.

For that reason I welcome the Minister's commitment to the concept of catchment management. It is important that control of our fisheries is essentially based at local level. If we are to get away from the old 19th century idea of the poacher and fishery owner structure which we have inherited, it is important there is community involvement at local level and that structures are put in place. The best way to deal with the problems of poaching, pollution and other pressures on the inland fishery resources is to involve those at local level such as anglers, clubs, those who have an interest in the fishery, environmentalists, etc. This will also protect and develop our fisheries. Those at local level know and understand their own local fishery and are in the best position to manage and be involved in it.

I was disappointed that the Minister only made a passing reference to the report of the salmon management task force. Clearly, the implementation of the second phase of the report of the task force requires legislation. If it is to be implemented in time for the 1998 season, it must be introduced early in the new year at the latest, in order to provide for the quota and tagging system which goes with it. This is important, because for the first time in a long time, the different interests in the salmon fishery are signed up in agreement with the recommendations contained in the task force report. It would be a pity if that opportunity was lost. I am concerned this will happen if the second phase is not proceeded with and if there is not an early commitment to proceed with the necessary legislation to give it effect. The Minister may find himself under pressure coming up to 15 May 1998 and the end of July 1998 to allow the season to open later. I urge him to give an early commitment to proceed with the second phase of that report and the introduction of the necessary legislation.

I agree with Deputy Stagg that the question of ownership will be a critical issue in this process. As the economic importance and value of inland fisheries is realised, the question of the ownership of our fisheries will come more sharply into focus. I would be appalled at any question of selling off the people's right to our fisheries. Deputy Kenny mentioned, for example, the huge sums of money that can be made from a week's fishing. It is said that American and Japanese business people will happily pay $6,000 or $7,000 for a week's salmon fishing in northern Russia. The implied suggestion is that we ought to follow that kind of model but we should be clear in rejecting it. We do not want to see a situation where the right to fish in our rivers and lakes is priced beyond the reach of the ordinary angler. I would caution strongly against any question of selling off fishing rights or introducing any kind of regime involving the payment of huge sums of money. By implication, that would mean only the very wealthy would be able to fish in our rivers and lakes. The first signs of any such system should be rejected.

I agree with Deputy Kenny about the river Moy. I do not understand why the transfer of the management of the Moy to the North Western Fisheries Board has not yet been completed. I hope the Minister will confirm in his reply that the process is being completed.

Mr. D. Carey

I am glad that a final review of fisheries will be made and that the Minister proposes to have a catchment management plan. In my experience of fisheries, it seems there has been a lack of definition within the law. One does not know exactly where the dividing line is between where anglers or net fishermen may operate or the definitions concerning snap, drift or draught nets. In my previous capacity as a Minister of State I visited many coastal areas where I found a great appreciation of the good work done by Deputy Gilmore in his period as a Minister of State. Many people who were fish farming along the coast appreciated the great efforts he made to untangle many of the problems that existed in those areas.

As regards the regional fishery boards, the former Minister of State, Deputy Gilmore, tried to implement a catchment management plan on the advice of officials. I know he travelled around the country and that he received plenty of advice. However, 14 licensees for drift or draughtnet fishing in the little village where I live believe they were not consulted about this matter.

If the Minister is to have another review his officials should devise a system whereby each licence holder would be made aware that such a review is taking place. That will at least require a letter to be sent to each licence holder, whether they are anglers or net fishermen. It is essential to achieve a consensus. The catchment management plan was implemented in the south-east and was making progress. I also understand, however, that it was not finalised and that agreement was not reached. I am quite certain it will be the same with the other major rivers.

I admire the tenacity of the Minister if he can deliver a final plan on this matter because it has eluded many other Ministers. A detailed review is necessary. As Deputy Gilmore pointed out, wild salmon, as a resource, is gradually being eroded. Maybe it will require draconian measures. If so, violence is likely to erupt because of the history of this issue. That is why I want to see wide consultation and local meetings. I know regional meetings are convenient for the fisheries boards and their officials, Department officials and the Minister, but individual fishermen have long family traditions in their families. People along the perimeter of the river may hold licences. It may be difficult to get them together, but if there is an opportunity for them to be consulted it should be taken, even if it means sending a registered letter.

I do not know how the new boards will be elected or what format they will take, but the previous system did not work. This was mainly because of the wide geographical diversity within each region. Most fishing in the Clare area is done on the Shannon, but it is regulated by someone in the Shannon Regional Fisheries Board in Drumkeeran in north Leitrim. I appreciate that those furthest from the centre need to be represented, but many decisions on the distribution of licences are made on a political basis. That may not yield the best results, and hereditary licences can be lost. In my constituency there are problems if such licences do not pass on to the next of kin when a licenceholder dies. I urge the Minister to be cautious and to plan for communication.

Fishermen are anxious for conservation measures. Anglers in Ennis put young salmon into rivers for many years, but they have been stopped recently because a particular spawn from the river Fergus had to be used, and the anglers were using spawn from the Shannon. The supply of salmon stopped as a result, and I understand the supply of trout has also stopped. Has the Minister reviewed this matter? If healthy fish can be purchased from the ESB or another reputable supplier, why not let angling clubs who want to improve the quality of fish in the river buy these fish? What are the difficulties? I have heard a disease mentioned, but the matter has never been fully explained. The Minister should refer to this in his reply.

I asked the Minister recently if he was going to stop drift net fishing on rivers and if he was going to confine tidal water fishing to anglers. He said he was not, and I want him to confirm that position. Drift net fishing is a misnomer. Such nets, when used at sea, can be six miles long and of a substantial, and occasionally illegal, depth. Users of these nets are being compared with fishermen who use nets 300 yards long in estuaries. These fishermen are aggrieved. They have a long family tradition, perhaps 200 years, of fishing the estuary. In the estuary abounding the Shannon there has been little or no landlord influence. Licences have been processed by the regional fisheries board and its predecessors and families have had a substantial income in the peak salmon season. The previous Minister made a sterling effort to conserve the breeding stock by reducing the fishing season for spring salmon, almost eliminating it. I do not know whether the Minister, Deputy Woods, intends to do likewise. If agreement is to be reached it is crucial that the Minister states his intentions with regard to spring salmon, the restructuring of the board and whether he intends to consult widely. Perhaps he will outline some of his ideas on the matter.

Mr. Ring

I welcome the decision to postpone the elections to the regional fisheries boards but the Minister will also have to postpone the proposals from the regional fisheries board in relation to the river Robe. This local amenity which has 12 sections has been put out to tender. We have fought the landlords for many years and we do not wish a situation to develop where Lord Ballinrobe or Lord Westport would own the river Robe. If this happened the local people would not be able to fish the river and would have to go, cap in hand, seeking permission to use it. This is a bad decision and one about which the anglers in the area are outraged. They are becoming organised, will fight it whatever way they can and will have my support. Deputy Stagg enjoys fishing and I met him during the summer when we viewed some of these beautiful rivers.

In reply to a recent parliamentary question the Minister said anglers had not invested in the industry. That is not correct, they have worked very hard over the years to maintain, restore and promote angling by means of fishing festivals and so on. The Minister's decision is a backward step. By putting it to tender the Germans, the English and the lords will once again own the land, the rights of way, the fishery rights and a serious situation will arise. I thought that in 1997 we had gone past that and would have taken a different road, that as a nation we were more mature and would not revert to the old way.

I recall an incident in the Foxford area where non-nationals owned the fishing rights. Those who had adjoining lands ended up in the High Court. The case cost them over £100,000 which they had to raise. They won the case in the Circuit Court but lost it in the High Court. Will the Minister ask the regional fisheries board to postpone the notifications immediately and have discussions with the anglers in relation to the river Robe?

There is an ongoing problem in relation to the river Moy about which there are some legal difficulties. I ask the Minister to try to resolve the matter as quickly as possible, given that it is a major tourist attraction. It would be preferable if it could be resolved locally. I recognise the Government is committed to it but there are some legal problems which I hope can be resolved.

In relation to Ballinrobe I urge the Minister not to allow the tenders to go forward. I ask the Minister to ensure that this local amenity is not divided into 12 different sections. People with money are always looking for an opportunity to invest. I have no problem with other nationals buying property but they do not want anyone to the side, front or rear of them. If the river Robe falls into the wrong hands local people will be unable to fish the river and those who offer bed and breakfast accommodation in the area will lose business. I do not want to see local people being forced to bid against each other for ownership rights to various sections of the river. It is wrong that tenders are being sought by the regional fisheries board. Deputy Stagg, the people of Ballinrobe and Mayo, those who love the sport of angling and I are opposed to this.

Last year restrictions were imposed whereby the number of days on which draft fishermen on the north Mayo coast could fish was reduced. This is wrong as they only make use of their licences for a few months of the year. While I appreciate that the regional fisheries boards have to take measures to conserve stocks, which have been low in recent years, Spanish boats which are as big as submarines take whatever is available leaving nothing for the locals. This matter will have to be addressed.

At a recent council meeting unofficial bed and breakfast establishments were the subject of many complaints. I made the point that the people concerned who operate for ten to 12 weeks of the year use the money to send their children to third level educational institutions. I also made the point that Bord Fáilte provides a bad service for the fee charged. Many operators cannot depend on it to provide business, they have no option but to market their own product. The world championships organised by the angling clubs in Ballinrobe attracted thousands of visitors to the area. We do not want to return to the days of the landlord when people will have to beg for permission to use our rivers and lakes.

I have always found the Minister to be a reasonable man. He must stop the regional fisheries boards from engaging in the tendering process.

Mr. Boylan

The postponement of the elections gives the Minister an opportunity to conduct an indepth review of the role played by the regional fisheries boards. It is right to pay tribute to them for the work they have done in recent years in promoting and conserving fish stocks in our rivers and lakes.

Counties Cavan, Monaghan and Fermanagh — the lake district of Ireland — offer some of the finest fishing and boating waters in the world. Has contact been made with the relevant authorities in Northern Ireland? The time is opportune to develop links with our neighbours across the Border who have a role to play in the preservation of our waters and the prevention of pollution.

On the matter of the development of our inland waterways and the enormous interest taken in them, perhaps occasioned by the present affluence which is good to see, the problem has arisen of people boating and fishing on the same lake which is simply not practicable. I suggest that certain lakes be designated solely for fishing purposes and others solely for boating purposes. I am not talking about casual boating activities but rather speedboats and jet skis which have become commonplace. Many people interested in fishing have told me that they are a nuisance, an annoyance and a danger. They say that while they have no objection to people enjoying a sporting activity, people in speedboats and on jet skis cannot be allowed on lakes while others endeavour to fly fish or cast bait for coarse fish from the banks of lakes or from rowing boats. It is dangerous and may well lead to an accident, apart altogether from driving away those entitled to fish in lakes.

While these are fast-growing new sports and those interested are entitled to engage in them and have their fun, they should take place within designated areas only. Since my county can boast of having a lake for almost every day of the year, it would be very easy to designate a number specifically for boating purposes, probably those with easier access rather than those more remote where there is better fishing.

I am delighted to observe the enormous progress made on the matter of measures to control farmyard pollution and the co-operation now obtaining between farmers, fishermen and fisheries boards. While I do not want to appear to be always defending farmers, coming, as I do, from a farming background I do not like generalised labels or a totally misplaced attitude being taken to them. The majority of farmers are honest, decent people but, as in all other walks of life, there are some cowboys.

Throughout the l960s, when farming was developing here and silage-making was new to us, farmers put down two slabs of concrete, one for silage and another for feeding their cattle, grantaided by the Department. They were small developments at the beginning of a new cycle in farming. Within those plans, there would have been provision for drainage running from the slab of concrete into an outlet leading eventually into a small stream or river. That was the thinking in the Department at the time. The concrete slabs were put in place and worked. I remind the House that farmers were not the instigators of that idea, rather it was the Department that grant-aided it. It is easy, with the benefit of hindsight, to blame Departmental officials for being short-sighted but in the course of any review of measures to be taken against pollution we must carefully examine proposals to ensure that we do not do harm down the road.

Once the problems arising from these outlets came to the fore and were realised, the fisheries boards took action and unfortunate farmers were prosecuted and berated, even to the extent of hitting the headlines in local papers, highly embarrassing to any decent farmer and his family. While not wishing to point the finger at various fisheries boards, they could have adopted a somewhat different attitude at the time. There is no doubt but that the message was got across and farmers knew they had to change that practice, which they did at enormous cost, providing tanks for holding effluent and so on.

Another serious problem arises from the overuse of phosphates. The Department and Teagasc convened meetings of farmers in local schools and parish halls to advise them on the use of fertilisers and the need to apply potash or phosphate in certain proportions or the nitrogen in the soil would not be activated. Farmers duly followed those instructions. Now they are told they were simply putting their money down the drain and they are being blamed for causing no end of problems. Again, that is a warning. If this review is to be undertaken, it is vital that good advice is obtained. When looking for good advice, it is hard to beat going out into the country and talking to a man of the soil because he knows what he is talking about. I am not against people in officialdom or those who give advice in certain areas, but difficulties can arise when people do not understand nature so it is important that we get this right.

I want to highlight the great achievement brought about through co-operation with the fishery boards, namely, the restoration of one of the finest lakes in the country, Lough Sheelin, which Deputy Stagg knows well. Ten years ago the lake was stagnant with no fish life. It has now been fully restored, notwithstanding the fact that some of the largest pig producers in this country, and one of the largest in Europe, operates on the banks of Lough Sheelin.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy has one minute remaining.

Mr. Boylan

The Leas-Cheann Comhairle is familiar with the lake also. I am sure he has enjoyed many an afternoon on it. He is always welcome to come back again, as long as he is not looking for votes. The point I am making is that a large piggery can operate successfully near one of our finest lakes. That is possible where there is co-operation and goodwill.

We should not overlook the role of farmers, landowners who are not farmers, the fishery boards and others who are interested in the promotion of tourism. There is great potential in this area and if we make the effort to market tourist areas properly and attract people into them, they will provide alternative enterprises for those currently experiencing difficulty in earning an income for their families. They can develop the tourism market knowing that tourists will come to these areas to fish which will benefit farmers, the fishery boards and others who enjoy the streams and the lakes.

Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources (Dr. Woods)

I thank Deputies for their wide-ranging, relevant and helpful comments. Everybody accepts what I am trying to do. We have had various reports and we want to move forward on the basis of a catchment area approach. That approach is intended to involve more people locally along the lines suggested here. Following that, I hope to go to Government with proposals in that regard and then come back to the House. I want to have the widest possible consultation. This is an ongoing process. Much of the basic work has been done by my predecessors, going back to the time when I was previously Minister for the Marine.

I want to refer to some of the issues raised, one of which concerns the river Robe and the issue of the tender documents. This is not a sale but a lease to which the conditions of a lease apply. These are Land Commission fisheries and I will look into those immediately. That is all I can say to the Deputy for the present. I would be very concerned if it were anything of the kind mentioned by a number of Deputies.

The decision in relation to the river Moy has been taken in principle, which some Deputies recognise, but two issues remain to be resolved; one relates to the title and the other is an industrial relations matter. I hope these can be resolved in the near future. In any event, in line with the catchment area approach, we want to have it transferred locally under the catchment area plan. There is no difference between Deputies and myself on this matter other than the question of ensuring that it can be brought about in practice.

Deputy Gilmore raised questions about the second phase of the salmon management task force. A marine institute assessment was carried out on this and that institute is preparing its recommendations. I expect they will be available before Christmas or in the early new year at the latest at which time I will make them public to enable those concerned to consider them. The Deputies who contributed to this debate have read and know the details of all the reports and they used them in regard to the progress of policy in this area.

Questions about cross-Border inland fisheries were raised. As the Leas-Cheann Comhairle would know this is an important point. A good deal of work is under way in this area. The INTERREG and the peace and reconciliation programmes are providing considerable funding for joint projects in that area, including the Erne salmon project which involves a sum of more than £1 million. I accept the points made by Deputy Boylan and we will consider this matter further because it is relevant and timely.

The river Robe was raised by many speakers and we will pursue that point as a matter of urgency. In regard to water pollution, I discussed the question of phosphates with Teagasc. I met representatives of the IFA and they both began work immediately on programmes and took the matter very seriously. I accept Deputy Boylan's point that farm organisations were quick to become involved in this important issue.

What we are doing is well understood and we are not trying to hide anything. We plan to deal with this matter in an open way with broad consultation. As most speakers said, it is timely to address this issue. It is for that reason we planned to postpone the elections for a year. That will provide an opportunity to deal with this matter, to adopt a catchment area approach and to hold elections following that.

Question put and agreed to.