I should like to thank the Senators for their very constructive contributions to this debate. As I indicated, the Bill is of limited scope requesting the Houses of the Oireachtas to approve the extension of the lifetime of the existing boards of conservators for a further year and also to give the Minister authority to increase licences from 1977. Senators availed of the opportunity to discuss the duties of boards of conservators, with particular reference to our salmon industry.
Salmon is a very important species of fish in every sense of the word. This can be guaged from the fact that last year our income from the export of salmon exceeded £3 million and, as I mentioned in the Dáil, that is a sizable sum of money and is helping towards the development of our economy. It is also helping in supplementing in a reasonable way the livelihood of a large number of salmon fishermen and others engaged in the processing of such fish.
The question has arisen, particularly since 1972, of dangers to our stocks. As Senator Higgins pointed out it is not an endless resource and then the question arises, how do we exploit that resource for economical reasons or, to a lesser degree, for recreational reasons while at the same time conserving it for future generations, something that was emphasised so forcibly by Senator Higgins? That is the problem the Department have. It is the problem of everybody, the boards of conservators and other bodies or groups of individuals interested in the development of our fishery industry, inland and sea fisheries. It is for this reason that five or six years ago the then Government asked a group of people to submit a report on our inland fisheries. At the time that request was made it was not thought that our salmon stocks were in any danger. Fishing for salmon did not have the same image nor was it as extensive as it has been since 1972.
The last Fisheries Act, with the exception of minor amending Acts, was in 1959 and, naturally, it was mandatory to update our fishery laws and in so doing to get as much information as possible from every source. The major source of information was the Inland Fisheries' Commission Report which took five years to compile. I also asked for views from many other groups interested in our inland fisheries and from individuals who may have had useful or valuable suggestions for embodiment in any future legislation that may be formulated. The final reports and recommendations from such bodies and individuals were not received before December, 1975.
I gave the House an assurance 12 months ago that I expected to have this legislation ready for introduction in the Dáil or Seanad this summer. Unfortunately, I was unable to keep to that for reasons I am sure everyone will agree are justifiable and soundly based.
As I mentioned, the last major Bill in so far as fisheries are concerned was introduced in 1959. The reports came to us late in 1975 and I did not like to rush the formulation of this legislation. I thought it was too important and that we should try to get further views and analyse the views we had. It was important that we should devote time to the preparation of such comprehensive legislation. That we have done and I hope the legislation will be ready for the end of the year, or very early in 1977. I am hopeful that we may still have it if the time of the Houses will permit us to discuss it late this year.
I am sure Senators will agree that it was better to continue the existing system and to extend the lifetime of the boards of conservators for a further year than, as I mentioned, rushing the proposed legislation through. Our inland and sea fisheries are very important and by their contributions Senators have indicated their interest in the development of fisheries and, particularly, their interest in the conservation of the king of fish, the salmon, so far as rivers and the sea are concerned.
Our volume of catches is increasing as is the income from such catches. In 1974 the figure from exports of salmon was £1,880,000 and it has moved to £3,129,994 in 1975. That is a sizable increase and it was due mainly to an improvement in price but there was an increase in the volume of catches. That is something we could not ignore but the system by which salmon are caught here, by drift-net, has aroused a great deal of opposition. As I indicated in the Dáil and other places, when I spoke on this question, there is a great deal of resentment about the extent of salmon catches and the decision of the Government to increase the number of people allowed to use drift-nets for salmon fishing. I can say to those people that we are mindful that salmon needs to be conserved. The orders I have made continue from year to year and should the 1976 reports indicate that we are too liberal in so far as the catching of salmon is concerned, we would act with a view to conserving our stocks to a greater measure than we are doing at present, by further restrictions in the regulations attached to drift-netting licences. A number of regulations were brought in in the last few years but the Seanad, without labouring the point too much, will agree that any industry worth as much as salmon fishing is—it represents more than 30 per cent of our total income from fishing—cannot be passed by lightly and will say fishing must stop because if it continues as at present stocks will disappear.
I have great respect, as has every Member of this House, for scientific advice. Those of us who do not have technical qualification to assess the habits of salmon, where they come from and go to must be guided to a large extent by scientific advice. The Department of Agriculture and Fisheries are fortunate in having first-class scientific information available but, at the same time, there is a divergence of opinion. Some think that if people did not catch the salmon around the sea and particularly in the estuaries, they would all flow up the river and be available for the rod fishermen in the inland centres. However, my information is that that is not so. Salmon are just as likely to move off to Greenland or some other country as they are to move up our rivers to be caught by the rod fishermen.
That is something about which we are gaining information all the time. At the same time, as Senator Deasy pointed out, the Government made a change in 1973 when they took office. Some said it was a gamble, and a very dangerous one, that we were gambling with our salmon stocks and if we persisted they would disappear but, fortunately, that is not the position. The volume of catches is increasing and we are reasonably satisfied that they will continue to increase. Should the opposite prove to be the case we will take appropriate action.
Senator Lenihan, speaking for the Opposition, and other Senators who contributed welcomed the Bill. Senators are reasonably satisfied to give powers to the Minister to increase licences as from 1977. I am sure everybody appreciates that licence duties and fees which were not changed since 1848, 1925 and 1959 need adjustment.
Senator West and Senator Martin were rather forceful about illegal fishing and poaching. The Department are totally against illegal fishing and will do everything possible to put it down. Parliament makes laws for the country and whether those laws refer to our fisheries or to any other aspect of our life they must be adhered to and honoured until they are changed constitutionally. I agree with Senator Higgins that people are annoyed about the position of private fisheries but until such time as it is decided to change regulations and make new ones the laws as they are at present must be enforced. I agree it is exceptionally difficult to enforce the fishery regulations in many areas. We do not expect to eliminate illegal fishing but we are trying to reduce it to the lowest level possible.
We know that with salmon at present fetching £2 per lb. there is an incentive for people who feel they should have a licence, as well as those who have one, to catch those fish illegally. It is possible that they do not see themselves committing a serious breach of our laws. It is a serious breach of our laws. The number of licences is limited and any person who has not a licence and is not legally qualified and is apprehended, brought before our courts and is punished will not get any sympathy from the Department. I made that statement in the Dáil last week and I repeat it now, that I firmly believe in upholding our fishery laws and punishing those in breach of them.
I agree with Senator Deasy that waterkeepers have an exceptionally difficult job to do. Many of them are doing it effectively and efficiently. I do not think the scope of this Bill would warrant me taking up the time of the Seanad by saying what may be included in future legislation but I have never made a secret of the fact that our present system of protection needs a great deal of scrutiny. It is obsolete. The protection of our inland and sea fisheries is made all the more difficult by the system that obtains at present whereby waterkeepers are appointed to cater for developments in their own immediate locality. They move out and may catch some neighbour, friend or relative illegally fishing. It is very difficult in such instances to bring such a person before the court. When a man takes on such a job and gets paid for it it is mandatory on him to do his job faithfully even though he may create enemies for himself in his own locality.
It is no harm to ask ourselves before our legislation is finally formulated, if this position should obtain at all so far as the protection of our fisheries is concerned. We do not appoint members of the Garda Síochána to look after the maintenance of law and order in their own locality; we do not appoint a guard to catch his next door neighbour who may be a publican in breach of licensing laws.
Members of the Garda Síochána are sent to districts removed from their homes so that they are not near their neighbours and relatives. The same system should apply to fishery inspectors and waterkeepers. This would ensure that they did not operate in their own immediate localities. Senator Deasy mentioned the inadequacy of pay and the employment conditions of waterkeepers. Since I took over this office the remuneration of waterkeepers has been improved. At that time the flat rate was £17 or £18 per week and now it is £44 per week. It has stayed above the level of our inflationary trend during that period. I realised that the rates of pay for waterkeepers were entirely inadequate and that their conditions were not up to standard. I am hopeful that Parliament will devise a system to improve their standard further and to uplift their status. I do not see why there should be any reflection on waterkeepers. Their work is similar to the work of the Garda Síochána. They are trying to uphold the fishery laws which are made by Parliament. It is an essential job and they should be given every encouragement.
We are doing everything in our power to ensure that our fish stocks are not depleted. Restocking is attended to by scientists and other officers of the Department. Senator Higgins said that it would be an advantage to everybody if our fisheries were nationally owned. That statement has been made by Members of the Oireachtas in the past, including myself, because there is a general feeling that our lakes and rivers should be freely fished by all who are qualified to fish them—those who get a licence in accordance with the laws of the State. The main difficulty in this respect is that our fisheries are in private ownership and are therefore private property. The fisheries that are deemed to be private are owned by people who, in many cases, bought them from previous holders. It would be a great advantage to have our fisheries under national control. Perhaps they would be acquired by the State on a compensatory basis over a certain period.
Our inland fisheries are of exceptional importance and their acquisition would be an advantage. I have always been a firm believer in private enterprise but our lakes and rivers should be owned by the State. That would be a desirable objective. That is for an authority superior to me to determine. We should be throwing out these ideas and getting reactions to them. I know there would be complications but difficulties can be overcome if there is the will to overcome them. That does not mean we want to take property without giving compensation. There is no need to go into the question of how the fisheries became private property originally. I am sure everybody in the House knows how that happened.
Senators Deasy, West and Martin referred to pollution. I agree that we must do everything possible to eliminate pollution. Legislation drafted by the Department of Local Government was discussed in this House recently. We were closely associated with it because of the advice we gave in relation to our fisheries. We have appointed six pollution officers. We must be very watchful for pollution in so far as it affects our fisheries.
Senator Ahearne expressed disappointement with the number of licences allocated to Kerry. As I indicated in the Dáil yesterday, in 1972 when drift-net licences were freely available at £3 each only five persons in Kerry had licences. There are now nine licence holders and they did not meet the strict criteria laid down for qualification for licences. The allocation of licences is carried out impartially. The boards realise that licences are very important. They scrutinise all the applicants and determine allocations in accordance with the regulations laid down by the Department. If any complaints are made about the allocation of licences they will be examined by the Department. I am satisfied that in carrying out this exceptionally difficult task of determining applications for drift-net licences the boards are doing it to the best of their ability. That is the information at my disposal.
The licence fees seem to have the approval of the Seanad and I am glad that that is so. They need to be changed to provide additional funds for the further development of our inland fisheries. I do not think there were any other points raised. I should be only too pleased to meet any Member of the Seanad at any time to discuss any aspect of our inland fisheries.