Skip to main content
Normal View

JOINT COMMITTEE ON EUROPEAN AFFAIRS debate -
Thursday, 18 Dec 2008

Eel Management Plan: Discussion.

The eel management plan arises from Regulation (EC) No. 1100/2007, establishing measures for the recovery of European eel stocks. As a result of the regulation, each member state must establish a national management plan for each river basin allowing for the escape to the sea of 40% of adult eels. Management plans must include details of how targets were reached, monitoring activities and verify that the objectives have been reached. They may include reducing commercial fishing activity, restricting recreational fishing and restocking measures. The deadline for the submission of national plans to the Commission is 31 December. Following Commission approval, plans must be implemented by 1 July 2009.

Today we will hear a presentation by Mr. Frank Sheridan from the Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources which has responsibility for inland fisheries. Before we begin, I draw attention to the fact that while members of the joint committee have absolute privilege, the same privilege does not apply to witnesses appearing before the committee. Members are reminded of the parliamentary practice that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses or an official, either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

I welcome Mr. Sheridan and ask him to make his opening remarks. The regulation has implications for several parts of the country. My neighbouring constituency of Longford-Westmeath has a keen interest in the issue. Members from that area are anxious for us to have an input.

Mr. Frank Sheridan

Members will be aware from the briefing note provided that the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources is required to submit a draft national eel management plan by 31 December for evaluation and approval by the European Commission. This is required under a Council regulation establishing measures for the recovery of European eel stocks.

By way of background, recent scientific research issued by the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea indicated that European eel fish stocks were so depleted that they were outside safe biological limits. Eels spawn in the Sargasso Sea and migrate randomly to many places from north Africa to northern Norway. Recruitment is at an all time low and has failed to recover. This decline has occurred in spite of a number of measures taken by individual member states to protect the eel's natural habitat and limit exploitation.

The EU regulation is an attempt to achieve recovery of the stock to a sustainable level. The regulation takes the diversity of habitats and fisheries affecting eel populations in river basin districts in the European Union into account. It requires that each member state adopt a national eel management plan, reflecting local conditions. On 27 November 2007 the European Commission issued guidance to member states advising how eel management plans should be prepared. The template which is prescriptive is attached to the briefing document as an appendix. It is expected that the evaluation to be undertaken on behalf of the Commission by an expert group supported by the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea will adhere closely to the guidance. The plan must be delivered to the Commission by the end of this year, for implementation from 1 July 2009 at the latest. The objective of each eel management plan is to reduce anthropogenic mortality so as to achieve a target escapement figure of 40% of the biomass of adult eels. The regulation provides the basis for calculating this. If the plan is not submitted on time, or is found not to be acceptable by the Commission, a mandatory 50% reduction in the fishery is required as an immediate first emergency measure.

The preparation of the national eel management plan by the Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources has been supported by a working group of officials comprising scientists and managers from the Marine Institute, the fisheries boards and other agencies responsible for advising the Minister and managing the eel fishery. In the absence of detailed information on recruitment, escapement and the status of stocks, a scientific model was used to project the impact of management actions on the achievement of the escapement target. The efficacy of this model has been endorsed by a number of other member states. We understand it is similar to that used by a number of them.

The Irish eel fishery harvests approximately 100 tonnes per annum. There are 150-200 eel fishermen who operate a maximum of 295 licences, although not all of them are actively fishing. The value of the reported catch is estimated to be between €500,000 and €750,000 per annum. Virtually all of the harvest is exported live to the Continent, although some fish are processed locally. Given the implications of the scientific advice, the absolute necessity to conserve remaining stocks, the obligation to contribute to the recovery of stocks in the shortest time possible and the practicality of managing a fishery in accordance with the regulation, the recommendation of the working group is for a series of management actions. Given the legacy of poor recruitment for the last 20 years, it is anticipated that the stock will continue to decline for at least the same period into the future.

The four main management actions recommended in the draft eel management plan which are aimed at reducing eel mortality and increasing silver eel escapement in Irish waters are the cessation of the commercial eel fishery and closure of the market; mitigation of the impact of hydropower, including a comprehensive silver eel trap and transport plan; the facilitation of upstream migration of juvenile eel at barriers; and the improvement of water quality in eel habitats. The option of reducing rather than ceasing the commercial eel fishery in some districts was considered and decided against for a number of reasons. The required traceability scheme would be uneconomical; the monitoring and enforcement effort would be disproportionate to value of the activity; and the recovery of the eel stock would take up to three times as long.

The adoption of all the measures in the eel management plan provides for the recovery of stocks to historical levels in the shortest time possible, 90 years, which is the equivalent of four eel generations. It should be noted that the achievement of the regulation target by Ireland depends on equivalent EU-wide action being taken. There will be a concerted effort to improve the databases and monitor stocks. An evaluation of the eel stock and management measures will be undertaken every three years until 2018 and every six years thereafter. Every effort will be directed at identifying diversification opportunities for commercial eel fishermen in the absence of resources for a compensation or hardship scheme. For the foreseeable future the management of the eel fishery will focus on conservation rather than catch.

I would like to focus on the eel fishery proposal. It is outrageous to think the Department could negotiate a 90-year ban on eel fishing in Ireland. I cannot understand it. When it was brought to the attention of the Fianna Fáil parliamentary party by Deputy O'Rourke who has been championing this issue for a long time, I could not believe it. Certain families have been involved in eel fishing on Lough Ree for many generations. I come from Castlecoote, County Roscommon, on the River Suck. When my wife's grandfather had the rights to the eel fishery in the area, he exported live eels to Billingsgate in London. There is no eel fishery on the River Suck at Castlecoote. The eel population spawns there before moving to Lake Linbaun. It is wonderful to have it in the area. I am outraged to think we would voluntarily give up fishing eels. I propose that we reject the Department's proposals. We should seek the deferral of any decision on this matter in order that it can be examined further. This proposal would have a detrimental effect on our tourism industry. Although I have never eaten an eel which is a beautiful fish, I understand it is a wonderful delicacy which is much sought after on the Continent. I would be inclined to develop rather than destroy this industry. I propose that the committee recommend the deferral of any decision on this proposal, pending further examination of its effect on this country.

I thank Mr. Sheridan for his submission. I congratulate the Department on the scientific detail it has made available. I accept that we are talking about fisheries, but I would like to mention that often this country does not make the most of its marine and seabed resources. We need to make progress in this regard. I often wonder whether many of our heritage and other resources are being destroyed without us realising it. I am not an expert on the eel industry. However, I understand it is worth between €500,000 and €750,000 to the economy. There are approximately 150 eel fishermen in this country. Can Mr. Sheridan confirm that it is proposed to ban eel fishing for 90 years? Am I right in believing that to be the case? I know that St. Patrick drove the snakes out of Ireland, but I am not sure whether the Greens are saving this country's eels.

Fianna Fáil will save them.

Those involved in Fianna Fáil are as slippery as an eel.

We will not speak about the respective characteristics of either group. It strikes me as a most extraordinary proposal. We are operating on the basis of the precautionary principle in this instance. I would not have a great deal of expertise in this area. However, the scientific advice seems to be that a 90-year ban is necessary. I would be interested in hearing Mr. Sheridan's views on the points made by Senator Leyden. Will a penalty be imposed on those who continue to catch eels? Will legislation be required? How will the abolition of eel fishing be policed? I have not received any representations from the eel industry. We do not want this to end up as "Eelgate". A 90-year ban would be extraordinary. Perhaps we should seek some more information on the matter. If the ban is implemented next year, will the Department put a system in place to ensure eel fishing will resume in 2099? Can we programme our computers to remind us in that year that eel fishing is to resume? How will we preserve the art of eel fishing? Will it become part of our mythology?

It is a slippery subject.

Like Deputy Timmins, I am not au fait with this issue. The proposal to introduce a 90-year ban sends alarm signals. None of us, not even the youngest members of the joint committee, will be around in 90 years’ time. I imagine that it might be more appropriate to deal with this problem on a phased basis. Perhaps the position can be examined after a generation.

An 80-year review.

Even a quarter century review. As we would be moving towards the next millennium by the time the position was reviewed, this appears a little over the top. Mr. Sheridan should provide some information for members on the reason stocks have diminished so greatly. Have they been overfished or poached or does this pertain to water quality? What gave rise to this proposal? Why is it only dawning on the Department now, given that remedial measures could have been introduced over time, rather than adopt this slash and burn approach? What will happen to the existing 295 licences? Will a set of proposals pertaining to the payment of compensation be made? Will the European Union provide funding to compensate them and will the Department do likewise? What is the position in respect of anglers? Do they specifically target eels or do they come across them by mistake when seeking trout, salmon, carp or other fish? How bad is the position in Lough Neagh, the most famous eel fishery of all? Are the authorities in Northern Ireland adopting a similar measure? Why do eels choose particular rivers over others?

All the way from the Sargasso Sea.

Top
Share