Written Answers. - Coastal Protection.
John Gormley
Question:
163
Mr. Gormley
asked the
Minister for the Marine
and Natural Resources if a commercial lug worm digging operation near Belmullet at Broadhaven Bay which is exported to the United Kingdom can cause damage; if his attention has been drawn to the fact that an environmental impact statement was prepared; the plans, if any, he has to grant a licence for this operation; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
[1123/00]
My attention was drawn to the harvesting of lug worm for commercial purposes at Blind Harbour in Broadhaven Bay, County Mayo and to local concerns over the possibility of damage to the cockle stocks and the environment generally.
I arranged for a technical officer of my Department and a representative of Dúchas, the Heri tage Service, which has responsibility for nature conservation, to inspect the site with representatives of Lugach Teo. which is the company organising the harvesting. They reported that they found no unacceptable environmental damage or evidence of damage to the cockle beds as a result of this activity. The company had discussions with Dúchas over the preceding two years and had carried out detailed studies before harvesting commenced. Dúchas has raised no objection to the harvesting of lug worm at this location as proposed and carried out.
The harvesting of lug worm is done on a strictly seasonal basis at low tide by digging with a fork. Lugach Teo. is training approximately 20 local people to do the work in an environmentally acceptable manner which minimises damage to the foreshore. The activities being carried out are no different from what is being carried out – and what has been carried out traditionally for several generations – in an unstructured manner all around our coasts.
There is no doubt that the activity concerned is, in the strict sense, a licensable activity under the Foreshore Acts, but so too is the collection of cockle, rag worm and periwinkle. It would be inequitable and indefensible to apply the provisions of the Act solely to this commercial activity. There would also be the risk that, if the requirement for a foreshore licence was insisted upon, the activities under the aegis of Lugach Teo. would be discontinued but would be continued by individuals in an unstructured way.
Having regard to all the circumstances, I decided that I would not insist upon foreshore licences being held by those gathering cockle, lug worm, rag worm or periwinkle provided that only traditional methods were used and that the agreement of Dúchas was obtained in regard to both methods and locations for such activities. I reserve the right to use my powers under the Foreshore Acts to order the cessation of digging or to regulate it if, for environmental or other reasons, I deem it appropriate to do so.
