Skip to main content
Normal View

JOINT COMMITTEE ON COMMUNICATIONS, MARINE AND NATURAL RESOURCES debate -
Wednesday, 31 May 2006

Depletion of Tidal Fishing on the River Suir: Presentation.

The next item on the agenda is a presentation from various fishing interests regarding the depletion of tidal fishing on the River Suir. I welcome Councillor Denis Landy of Carrick-On-Suir Town council, Mr. Peter Walsh of the Southern Regional Fisheries Board and Mr. Bobby Power of the Carrick-On-Suir Snap Net Fishermen's association. We will receive a short presentation which will be followed by a question and answer session. I request that all mobile phones be switched off.

I draw attention to the fact that members of this committee have absolute privilege but that this does not apply to witnesses appearing before the committee. The committee cannot guarantee any level of privilege to witnesses appearing before it. Further, under the salient rulings of the Chair, members should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the House or an official by name in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. I thank Deputy Broughan for bringing this matter to our attention. I welcome any Members not members of this committee but representing their constituency here today.

Councillor Landy makes serious charges in the document he issued to the committee. I ask the councillor to summarise it and relate the difficulties facing Carrick-On-Suir.

Councillor Denis Landy

I thank the committee for receiving us. I also thank Deputy Hayes and Senator Mansergh for attending as representatives of the constituency. The issue we have come before you today to discuss is the depletion of traditional fishing grounds on the River Suir at Carrick-On-Suir as a result of illegal actions carried out by agents acting on behalf of South Tipperary County Council and Carrick-On-Suir-Town Council. The installation of an outfall pipe consisting of ten diffusers — which are vertical pipes about 14 inches high — and two buoys in the middle of the best fishing stretch of water locally has meant that three out of the seven sections known locally as hauls are now inaccessible and therefore cannot be fished. The committee members will see a photograph of the buoys on the back of their presentations and they are halfway across the river. The final photograph depicts ten diffusers lodged on the riverbed — the water from the sewage treatment plant emerges from these under pressure because this stretch of the river is tidal.

Snap net fishing has been carried out in the area since the thirteenth century and involves four men, a crew, in two small boats known as cots spreading a net usually 16m wide across the river at certain locations and paddling into the oncoming tide in search of salmon moving up stream. Two of the men handle the net while the other two paddle and steer the individual boats. The snap net operates on the basis that when it is spread across the river it opens like a woman's handbag with one weighted rope dredging along the river bed and the other rope controlling the net along the surface. When a salmon hits the net the ropes are pulled to close the net, or handbag, and trap it inside.

The fishing grounds in and around Carrick-On-Suir are tidal, despite being 40 miles from the open sea, which is very important in relation to the foreshore licence. They have been fished by generations of families as a means of subsistence to supplement other incomes. The town of Carrick-On-Suir is quite economically depressed despite the national economic boom and has 956 people unemployed which equates to almost 18% of the population of the town. All existing employment and economic activities in the area must be assisted and protected to prevent a total collapse of our local fragile economy.

The Southern Regional Fisheries Board issues 132 snap net licences annually. Of these, 68 are on the River Suir and 19 are issued to crews based in Carrick-On-Suir. In recent times, prior to the installation of these pipes, commercial fishing quotas had fallen dramatically and the season had also been reduced. However, the average catch in Carrick-On-Suir has been as good as, if not better than, other areas under the aegis of the Southern Regional Fisheries Board.

Local fishermen were alerted to the imminent threat to their fishing grounds when the matter was raised by representatives of the contractors on a visit to the proposed location on the river where the outfall pipe was to be installed. During these discussions it was made clear to the contractors that no pipes should be installed at this location as it would have a detrimental effect on fishing in the area. The local fishermen were assured that the pipes would be on the bed of the river and that the snap nets could glide over them without any snagging occurring. The snagging occurs when the net, moving down the bed of the river, catches the diffusers, which stand upright.

Despite this apparent assurance the snap net fishermen, through their spokesperson Mr. Frank Morrissey, expressed their concerns on the location of the outfall pipe, diffusers and buoys by way of correspondence with Mr. Ger Walsh, Town Clerk, Carrick-On-Suir Town Council, in November 2003. A reply was received acknowledging receipt of the letter and Mr. Morrissey was advised that the concerns were referred to Nicholas O'Dwyer Ltd., Consulting Engineers, for its views.

As a result of the matter being raised at the Fisheries Board by Mr. Peter Walsh a meeting took place between Mr. Patrick Kilfeather, Senior Fisheries Environmental Officer, Southern Regional Fisheries Board and Mr. Noel Keating, Bowen Civil Contractors for South Tipperary County Council on 20 January 2004. Mr. Kilfeather examined the proposed final outfall design and informed Mr. Ger Walsh in correspondence following the meeting, "that these proposals are wholly unacceptable from a fisheries point of view". He advised that the council may be liable for any loss or damage consequent on such fouling and requested that the council not proceed and instead install or have installed such diffuser arrangements as will not lead to fouling risk and damage as referred to. A copy of the memo was also sent to the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources.

Mr. Neill Guha, foreshore section, coastal zone management division, Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources wrote to South Tipperary County Council and Carrick-on-Suir Town Council following receipt of correspondence from Mr. Patrick Kilfeather to advise that:

The council must not carry out any works which will impact on foreshore or authorise any person or company to do so on its behalf, other than those covered by the 2003 licence. Phase II of the scheme has not yet been licensed by the Minister and as such any works carried out in relation to it would be illegal. You are hereby notified if the diffuser outfall has not been licensed by Phase I all works must cease and the foreshore returned to its original state.

The outfall pipes, diffusers and buoys were installed into the River Suir despite all of the above warnings and instructions in early 2004.

The effect on the snap net fishermen since has been that three of the seven hauls in their fishing grounds have now become unusable. I refer the committee to a hand drawn sketch that illustrates this point. The sketch shows where the hauls are. They are the south haul, the north haul and the channel haul. The horseshoe is where the diffusers are located. None of these can now be fished because there is not enough time to either put down or take up the net. The river is not fishable from Carrick-on-Suir down to Waterford. Only certain sections of the river are fishable because of obstructions in the river because of the flow of the tides and the flow of the river itself. It is very important to note that.

A series of meetings has since been held to highlight the problem. The first was held with council officials and the contractors on 14 September 2004. Another was held with representatives of the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, the Southern Regional Fisheries Board and the town clerk on 5 May 2005 at which the Department official advised that the foreshore licence was only agreed in principle but that none was issued to the local authority. We understand that is still the case 13 months on and that no licence has yet been issued.

The matter was raised in the Dáil by my party colleague, Deputy Broughan, on 5 May 2005, the day of the meeting in Carrick-on-Suir. During questioning by Deputy Broughan of the then Minister of State at the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, Deputy Gallagher, it was accepted by the Minister of State that "the Council should not have commenced outfall work on the foreshore until the foreshore licence was in place and it was advised as such by letter in January 2004". The Minister of State met with a deputation in Carrick-on-Suir and the case was again outlined to him following which he agreed to re-examine the issue. In a reply to a follow-up parliamentary question tabled by Deputy Broughan in recent weeks, the current Minister of State with responsibility in this area, Deputy John Browne, stated that the problem was localised and minor and that he did not consider that any action in relation to the location of the outfall pipe, diffusers and buoys would be warranted.

The traditional fishing rights of local fishermen have been breached and almost half of their fishing grounds have been put out of use. This point was accepted by the Minister in his Dáil reply but no action is proposed at this time. We are clearly stating that the resolution to this problem is to move the outfall pipe, diffusers and buoy approximately 100 m downstream of the fishing grounds to a location that is not fished or fishable, compensate the fishermen for their loss of earnings since 2004 to the date of completion of the work or, alternatively, provide compensation for past, present and future loss of earnings resulting from the illegal action that has taken place. When we met Department and county council officials we put forward engineering solutions which were dismissed out of hand. If there is another engineering solution to this problem we are prepared to consider it.

There is an issue of natural justice regardless of compensation or any other remedial works. An illegal action has been carried out by installing these diffusers and buoys in the River Suir thus preventing fishermen from carrying out their traditional craft. This must be rectified. Ordinary citizens going about their daily lives in a lawful fashion are being affected by what is, in effect, an illegal development by the statutory body, South Tipperary County Council, that is charged with regulating planning in the county. On our way here today we passed a building which is very much in the news, the owner of which was told by An Bord Pleanála this week to remove it. We are in a situation where a statutory body is preventing the men alongside me from fishing.

We thank the Chairman and the committee members for their time. We note and take an interest in the work of this committee. It addressed the issue of the weir on the River Nore in County Kilkenny in which Mr. Peter Walsh, as a member of the Southern Regional Fisheries Board, has an interest. It also addressed the issue of communications in the Black Valley. We, therefore, believe this has been a perfect opportunity for us to address this committee and get results. We are available to answer any questions that any member might have.

I thank Councillor Landy for his presentation. Before I call Deputy Broughan, let me state that Councillor Landy has made a number of charges. The other side must have an opportunity to respond. The committee will not, therefore, draw any conclusions today in respect of the charges laid. The committee will probably investigate the matter.

I thank the Chairman for providing the delegation with an opportunity to put their case to the committee and tell their remarkable story. I welcome my colleague, Councillor Denis Landy of South Tipperary County Council, Mr. Peter Walsh, Mr. Bobby Power and Mr. Frank Morrissey. I have been aware, over the past number of years, of the circumstances in which this extraordinary situation developed. I commend my colleague who has pursued this matter very vigorously on behalf of the people of Carrick-on-Suir and South Tipperary.

I would like clarification on a couple of points. Councillor Landy stated that 40 miles downstream of Carrick-on-Shannon, traditional fishing by net fishermen has been completely ruined as a result of a development carried out by South Tipperary County Council. It seems three of the seven hauls are gone and a large portion of traditional fishing has been destroyed by the development.

I note what the Chairman said. However, it seems that South Tipperary County Council and Carrick-on-Suir Town Council behaved illegally in carrying out certain works and installing diffusers and buoys without a foreshore licence. It appears from what Councillor Landy said that Mr. Kilfeather's point was never answered. The works should have been compatible with the local fishery environment and it is clear they are not. It is regrettable that, while the former Minister of State at the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, Deputy Gallagher, seemed to be moving towards making it clear to the local authority that an illegal act had taken place, the current Minister of State, Deputy Browne, has backed away from that in recent times. I urge the Chairman to ask the Minister of State to examine, as a matter of urgency, the extent to which installing diffusers and buoys and thus destroying the fishery was an illegal act, and to resolve or amend the situation.

The issue of the local economy is very important. We are concerned about all the inland fisheries. Given that Carrick-on-Suir and the surrounding district has such high unemployment in the Celtic tiger economy, it is deplorable that this source of income has been removed from the local population. Has there been any meeting with the so-called three wise men, Mr. Padraic White, Professor Collins and a third member, whose name I cannot remember at the moment, who are now taking soundings in regard to the management of salmon, to discuss the future of the fishery?

Councillor Landy is right in that a solution must be found. The plan outlined is reasonable and we might hear what we as a committee should do to ensure the position is remedied.

A solution must be found and the plan outlined is reasonable. We might hear what we as a committee should do to ensure that the position is remedied.

Councillor Landy may share the questions with his colleagues if he wishes to do so.

I too welcome the delegation. Was the appropriate body, South Tipperary County Council or Carrick-on-Suir town council, invited? Obviously it would have a different view. Perhaps we will invite it or get a response in writing. It appears it has a very serious case to answer and that there is a need for a foreshore licence.

Prior to the Tall Ships Race in 2005 in Waterford, when a foreshore licence was needed on the quays along the River Suir, it was discovered that the legislation was defective. Apparently everybody thought that the foreshore extended from the low water mark to the high water mark, but it transpired that it extended to the 12-mile limit. I do not know whether that complicated this in any way — it probably did not. Are we sure that there is a need for a foreshore licence in respect of the work that has been carried out? If there is such a need, I am surprised at the inaction of the Department. If the facts are as set out — and obviously we have to hear the other points of view as well — the Department should take action.

Is there any OPW involvement in this matter? The Chairman and I, representing the committee, went to Kilkenny to examine the problem of the weir on the Nore. The OPW was very much involved there and caused many of the difficulties. I wonder if it is involved in some way in the design or carrying out of the work.

I thank the Chairman for inviting me to this committee meeting and I welcome the delegation. I played some role in setting up the meeting referred to in the report with the Minister of State, Deputy Gallagher, through the good offices of Councillor Patsy Murphy, when he came to open the marina in Carrick-on-Suir in June 2005. Since this matter has been brought to my attention I have always had sympathy with the rectification of the problem. Other similar but larger problems like the weir in Kilkenny have been referred to as precedents. Notwithstanding the problems that no one would deny, Carrick-on-Suir has made much progress and developed a good deal in the past few years.

I should like to ask the spokesperson for the group, Councillor Landy, a few questions which he might be in a position to answer since he is a member of South Tipperary County Council. Does the county council accept that it acted illegally or improperly? There is certainly the prima facie presumption from the Minister that this may be the case. Perhaps Councillor Landy could shed some light on that. If it accepted that, presumably it would accept an obligation to rectify it.

As a member of the county council, would Councillor Landy have any idea of the cost of the proposal to move 100 m downstream and whether there would be any practical difficulties in doing that? It is arguably as much a county council matter as a central Government matter. I am sure he is making continuing efforts to persuade the council to take action to rectify matters. It seems that in the first instance the responsibility and the remedy should fall on the county council, while not denying that if this fails, there may be a case for intervention by the Department.

Councillor Landy

I will answer some the questions and allow others who have more expertise regarding fishing to answer the remainder. The rectification cost we were quoted at a meeting with the council and the Department official was in the order of €1 million. That is for moving the pipe.

As to where liability lies, I will cite a letter I received from the then town clerk of Carrick-on-Suir on 14 October. He stated that we requested that the matter be examined with a view to advising on whether the fishermen should make a submission of claim to the council or to the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources in relation to the problem. We wanted guidance as to where we should go. The letter went on to explain that the matter was examined by Mr. John Crowley. It continued that having examined the documentation on file it was not possible to advise who was the responsible authority without a detailed submission of claim in hand. My interpretation is that unless we made a legal claim in the matter we would not get an answer. That was the response from the local authority almost two years ago.

I presume that as a county councillor you would be in a position to comment or make submissions on the matter, separately from representing the interests concerned.

Councillor Landy

I am quite well able to make representations on many matters. I felt this was so serious that I should put my representations in writing, which I did. That was the response I got.

Is this a reserved function of the manager or the councillors' function?

Councillor Landy

It is an executive function of the manager. Anything to do with infrastructure is an executive function. We do not have a say in the chamber in relation to these matters.

You are allowed to discuss them though.

Councillor Landy

Absolutely.

The manager prescribes.

I accept that.

Councillor Landy

Senator Kenneally asked whether there was a need for a foreshore licence. A letter from Mr. Neill Guha of the foreshore section of the coastal zone management division of the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, states:

The Council must not carry out any works which will impact on foreshore or authorise any person or company to do so on its behalf, other than those covered by the 2003 licence. To do so would constitute a breach of Foreshore Acts 1933-2003. Phase II of the scheme has not yet been licensed by the Minister and as such any works carried out in relation to it would be illegal.

The licence issued in phase I was for outfall pipes at three locations. A licence was not issued for placing the buoys or the diffuser unit in the river. There was a requirement for a foreshore licence.

The councillor might make those papers available to the clerk of the committee.

Councillor Landy

I certainly will. There is no involvement of the OPW, presumably because it is in tidal water. I will ask Peter Walsh to respond regarding the recent meeting with the three wise men, as they are euphemistically called.

Mr. Peter Walsh

I am a snap net representative on the South Region Fishery Board, but I am not representing the fishery board as such. We met the three wise men on Monday. Whilst their brief was the conservation of wild salmon and the hardship that may be caused by the cessation of driftnet fishing, we pointed out a number of areas that should be tackled. However, the issue with which we are dealing today was not raised. I was allowed four minutes in which to present a case on behalf of snap net.

We will stick with this issue.

Councillor Landy

I will ask Bobby Power to explain what is meant by fishing hauls. Bobby is a fishermen on this river.

Mr. Bobby Power

I have a sketch here which shows a north haul and a south haul. The north haul occurs first and the south haul is 50 yd. away. Our buoys would go the end of the channel haul on the ebb tide if that pipe and the diffusers were not there. Then on the flood tide they have to stop before that buoy because the channel net takes over and drifts back towards the buoys and these diffusers. All the hauls end at the point indicated and if the pipe had been left out there it would not be in anyone's way.

Councillor Landy

Reference was made to the income from fishing, while Senator Mansergh mentioned Carrick-on-Suir itself. We are not claiming that the income from this fishing alone sustains people, but it is part of their income. It has been traditional on this river since the 12th century. The first licences were issued by theButlers, earls of Ormond, for one penny. I am very proud of Carrick-on-Suir, the place where I live, and of the infrastructure we have. We have an unemployment problem which we intend to solve.

I welcome the delegation and thank them for their presentation. The reply by the Minister of State, Deputy Browne, to Deputy Broughan describing this plight as localised and minor is an absolute insult to fishermen who since the 12th century have carried on this traditional type of fishing which has generated an income for families. The presentation states that an illegal action has been carried out by installing these diffusers and buoys on the River Suir, thus preventing fishermen from carrying on traditional crafts. Within the council, have you asked for a legal report from the solicitor in regard to these actions? Have you contemplated seeking independent legal advice? The fact that a foreshore licence has not been issued in respect of phase II, and is doubtful in respect of phase I, is a blatant violation of procedures. Have you sought legal opinion at council level and have you sought independent legal advice?

The marine is not my portfolio, although I wear many hats. I congratulate the delegation on the presentation, which makes a compelling case. We should consider what they have had to say and examine also the other side of the case. It should not be beyond our wit to accommodate a traditional activity which has been carried on for centuries, as well as modern development. I do not see any reason the two should not co-exist.

Councillor Landy

I thank Deputy Ferris for being in attendance. We are aware of his personal interest in fishing. We, the snap net fishermen, have a legal adviser in this matter. We have stressed that we want to see it resolved without recourse to law. We are very reasonable people. We came here today with a view to finding a solution. As lay people, we have proposed commonsense solutions and have been told by an engineering expert that these solutions are not feasible. Before the committee are three people who between them have 100 years' experience of fishing on this river and know every stone and rock in it. If they cannot put forward a workable solution, no engineer will. We are certainly amenable to a solution if it should come from this committee.

We have not sought a legal report from the council at this point because we have been pursuing it according to the methodology I have outlined. This is a very serious issue for the 19 licence holders in Carrick-on-Suir and their families, although it might be minor in the worldwide scheme of things. It goes beyond money — it goes to the core of traditional rights dating back to the 12th century. I thank Deputy Durkan for his supportive comments.

Not being a member of the committee, I hesitate to make suggestions, but one option the committee has is to send a copy of the written presentation to the county manager, drawing his attention to particular passages relating to the council and asking him to respond. Based on that response, the committee could decide whether or not to issue an invitation to attend. It would have the merit of showing that the issue had been raised to a higher level.

Absolutely. I think we are of like mind.

We should hear from South Tipperary County Council and from the Department. Prima facie, an illegality has taken place. It should not have happened. We need to know what remedial measures could be put in place, without continuing further down the road which has been followed since 2004.

As has been suggested, we will send all the papers the delegation has in its possession to the Secretaries General of the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources and the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government for their response. We will also write to South Tipperary County Council and probably to the town council in Carrick-on-Suir and we will await their response. The committee will then decide on the next step. That is the normal practice. I thank Councillor Landy and the other members of the delegation for attending.

Mr. Walsh

I might say that it would be no harm to get a response from the fishery board as well. I have raised this matter over and over again.

The clerk will examine the transcript of this meeting and the committee will issue formal letters. I again thank the delegation and apologise for delaying them.

Sitting suspended at 3.51 p.m. and resumed at 3.56 p.m.
Top
Share