Seanad Éireann debate -
Thursday, 9 Jul 1987

Vol. 116 No. 16

Fisheries (Amendment) Bill, 1987: Second and Subsequent Stages.

Question proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

Minister of State at the Department of the Marine (Mr. P. Gallagher)

The object of this short Bill is to close a loophole in fisheries legislation as disclosed by a recent judgment of the Supreme Court.

The background to the matter commenced in 1982 when an Enniscrone, County Sligo, fisherman was convicted in the District Court of using a "fixed engine" contrary to section 97 of the Fisheries (Consolidation) Act, 1959. He appealed his case to the Circuit Court which sought the opinion of the Supreme Court as to whether the fisherman's net was a "fixed engine" within the meaning and for the purpose of the Fisheries Acts, 1959 to 1983.

It was the unanimous judgment of the Supreme Court that the net was undoubtedly fixed to the soil but that it could not rank as a fixed engine unless it was also "stationary" which it was not. Accordingly the net was outside the statutory definition of "fixed engine" and so the conviction of the fisherman has had to be set aside in the Circuit Court.

It is desirable to close the loophole in the legislation as otherwise some salmon fishermen may attempt to avail of it and use nets that under the existing legislation cannot now be deemed as "fixed engines" and, consequently, their use would not be prohibited under section 97 of the Fisheries (Consolidation) Act, 1959. This could pose a serious threat to salmon.

As Senators will no doubt observe on a perusal of the Explanatory and Financial Memorandum which I circulated with the Bill, three changes have been made in the amended definition as compared with the existing definition. In order to deal with the defect disclosed in the judgment of the Supreme Court I have deleted the expression "or held by hand or made stationary in any other way" and replaced it by "or by any other means". I have added the expression "or a drift net" so as to make it clear that drift nets which were not fixed engines under the old definition continue to be excluded by the revised definition. Finally, acting on the advice of the Attorney General, I have made a slight change in the reference to "anchors".

I regard the Bill as an important conservation measure. We have to continue in our efforts to conserve our very valuable salmon stocks. I am pleased to be in a position to tell Senators that there is some evidence this year of an improvement in the escapement of salmon into fresh water. Our country is one of the few in Europe where salmon angling is still available and it makes a substantial contribution through tourist revenue.

Since coming into office the Minister, Deputy Daly and I have met the managers of the regional fisheries boards. The Minister also had meetings with some of the boards and he and I will be meeting the remainder as soon as possible. At these meetings he stated that, in so far as it is possible to do so, they should aim at stamping out illegal salmon fishing within the limits of the resources available to them. We have the support of the Naval Service and the co-operation of the Garda Síochána in pursuing our objective in this regard.

Turning to the new Department of the Marine, I want to say that one of the major reasons for its establishment was to facilitate the development of a coordinated overall approach towards our marine industries so as to exploit to the maximum their potential for jobs. The main thrust of the commercial development division of the new Department will be to produce long term policies for our marine industries including inland fisheries and in particular our very valuable salmon fisheries.

As I stated at the outset, the purpose of this Bill is to close a loophole in the fisheries legislation. I regard it as an important measure to assist in ensuring the conservation of salmon.

Mr. Manning

I welcome the Minister of State and wish him well in his new responsibility. If he does not know everything there is to be known about fishing and fisheries, very few people do, given where he comes from and his business background. On behalf of this side of the House I wish him every success.

I will not get into a technical discussion about fixed engines. Before this Bill was introduced in the other House I had no idea what a fixed engine was. I had great difficulty associating the idea of a fixed engine with fisheries. However, the Minister in his short speech today had outlined the technical nature of the Bill and how and why it has become necessary to tighten up the definition of a fixed engine to prevent further abuses and further illegal fishing due to the loophole which came into existence after the Supreme Court judgment.

All fixed engines, stake nets, bag nets, fixed draft nets, head weirs fixed to soil or rock and secured in one or more places are all now illegal. I am not speaking as an expert but the Minister in this Bill seems to have covered all possible loopholes. I certainly hope he has because the consequences of further loopholes appearing could be very serious.

This Bill, although short, is important and give us an opportunity to focus on two items of major current importance in the Minister's Department. There is the ever-growing problem, of salmon conservation versus drift net fishing. It also gives us a chance to ask whether the fisheries board — I am glad the Minister met them in recent times — have sufficient funding to carry out their full range of functions, which are far wider than most people realise. They include management, conservation, powers of protection and of developing and promoting. The last aspect, developing and promoting our inland and sea angling resources are probably crucial in the current economic climate.

The question of drift nets was discussed at some length in the other House and questions were asked about the report of the salmon review group which was set up by the last Government. I would be interested to hear from the Minister the current status of that report, if, in fact, he accepts its main findings, if he will be publishing it and if it will be the basis for action. The scope and nature of the drift netting problem is all to apparent. At the moment drift netting is taking far too high a proportion of salmon from the sea. This means that the requirements of individual rivers are being very adversely affected. The drift net fishermen follow the main runs of salmon at sea, their hauls generally are large and make it virtually impossible for sufficient numbers of salmon to get into the rivers in question. In many rivers it is likely that there will be insufficient numbers of salmon to regenerate and ensure adequate supplies in the future.

At present, more spectacularly, there is the problem of enforcement. I am glad to see the commitment from the Minister on talks held with the various interested groups and of the full backing for the law enforcement agencies of the State. This problem of enforcement can often cause difficulty to Deputies and Senators in particular areas. Very often the people involved may otherwise be law-abiding. They may even be friends or supporters of the Deputy or Senator in question and there can be difficulty about giving adequate backing to the law enforcement agencies. I am glad of the full commitment of the Minister in that regard. In recent times we have seen pictures of very ugly events as law enforcement officers of this State have tried to board vessels which were obviously involved in illegal fishing. Such attacks on the law enforcement agents cannot be tolerated.

At present I gather there are about 820 drift net licences held by fishermen who are trying to make a living in very difficult circumstances. But the problem of drift net fishermen is not common to this country only. Other countries have had to face up to that problem also. I would be interested in hearing from the Minister if it would be possible to get — not today, obviously — some type of summary of how other countries faced, with a similar problem, are attempting to resolve it. We live at a time when what was unthinkable 20 years ago is happening, that we would actually pay farmers not to produce milk, not to produce butter — as is happening now in parts of Britain where farmers are being asked not to grow crops, not to do the things farmers always did in times of surpluses. The principle is being accepted that people may well have to move out of traditional areas of husbandary but on the principle that they will be compensated. I wonder if it might be possible to persuade people to get out of drift net fishing on the basis that they would be compensated. I do not know; it might very well be that the cost would be exorbitant. I believe Canada has been adopting practice of trying to phase out drift net fishing, but on the basis of compensation. I do not know enough about it. I do not know if it has worked in Canada. I do not know if the fishermen have taken the compensation and then gone back fishing in another area which would always be a possibility. But I would be interested to know whether the Minister or his Department have any information on that. Norway is the only other country that I am aware of which has been facing up to the problem. Their policy has been to ban all drift netting at sea. It may be that the cost of compensation will be exorbitant. It could also be that a simple ban on ruthless activity might be counter-productive. However, I have a very open mind on the problem. I will be interested to hear in some specific detail the Minister's views on the subject.

My last point concerns the potential of our inland and sea angling resources. This subject was touched on by a number of speakers yesterday in an excellent debate on the Tourist Traffic Bill and the role of Bord Fáilte. A number of Senators referred to this resource which, as a country, we under-value and under-use. I am not sure of the exact figures but I believe we have an inland surface water of over 300,000 acres of lakes, we have over 8,000 miles of main channel rivers. That is a far higher proportion of land under water than is the case in most other European countries, certainly higher than Britain. This resource is not particularly costly in its upkeep although I am appalled in certain parts of the country at the lack of local effort.

In a debate this morning the Minister of State at the Department of Industry and Commerce, Deputy Séamus Brennan, talked about the role of the State in helping companies to export. I agreed with everything he said about the State not being the body which should have to get involved in all of these activities. I am appalled at the lack of local effort and pride in some of our rural towns in developing the inland waterways, in beautifying them, making them a place of pleasure for the people who live in the area. If I might be totally parochial for a moment and mention as an exception my home town of Bagenalstown, County Carlow, the approach to which is an example to other towns of what can be done where there is an inland waterway, where trees and shrubs have been planted, where a great local effort has been made to turn what is a natural amenity into a source of local recreation and pride. I am appalled at the frequent lack of local patriotism and local effort in making the best use of these resources. It is not particularly expensive to keep our waterways in good shape. Again, in passing and in parenthesis may I say how appalled I am at the state of the Grand Canal in Dublin one notices as one travels from the Naas Road along the canal. In any other city in Europe it would be a major source of attraction. It would be used by the citizens for fishing and boating, and it would be visually attractive. Yet the Grand Canal is an eyesore at present with very little attempt made to turn it into the resource it could be.

Most of our waterways are not expensive to maintain. Most of them are renewable as a resource. Many of them are in very valuable settings. I know the Minister is aware of this. I know he is aware that last year we made £30 million from tourist angling revenue, we made half of that sum again in revenue from Irish anglers and 1 believe we are only scratching at the surface. I know that, in many cases, there are local rivalries with vested interests which make difficult the development of our angling resources. I hope that the Minister, in conjunction with Bord Fáilte, will turn his attention to this matter.

I hope we will get from this Government an integrated, positive policy document on the development of our fisheries and inland waterways. They are a great natural resource. It is a matter of scandal that over the years successive Governments have failed to exploit this potential. I hope the Minister will do so and, in so doing, I wish him well. I commend this Bill.

Mr. D. Kiely

I too welcome the Minister to the House. I welcome this short Bill whose provisions are vitally necessary for the protection of our fishing stock. I smiled to myself when Senator Manning mentioned that he did not really know the meaning of a fixed engine. In my part of the country many people in the folklore business could tell the Senator the meaning of a fixed engine. Indeed I am sure the Minister would have plenty of advisers in his constituency in that respect also.

The provisions of this short Bill are vitally important to stamp out illegal fishing. There has been definite evidence of such attempts being made this year by the new Department of the Marine to prevent large trawlers using their monofilament nets. There is also evidence of more salmon in our rivers this year.

Senator Manning mentioned our discussions in the House yesterday. There is no doubt that tourism and fishing are cousins. The potential of fishing as a tourist attraction has only been scratched on the surface. There is vast need for improvement in that area. I welcome the establishment of the new Department of the Marine and its potential in job creation.

I am very concerned about the pollution of our rivers. It is pointless safeguarding fish stocks if they are to be killed by pollution of our fresh waters. This problem will have to be tackled. Could the Minister tell me what his Department are doing about the recent incidence of red tide found in one of our harbours in west Cork? This is a serious problem. We do not know whether the Department's inspectors have carried out an inspection. Also I should like to know what provisions the Minister or his Department have made to deter or prevent the importation of any live fish or fish eggs into this country.

Mr. Ferris

Together with my colleagues, I want first to extend a welcome to the Minister of State and to congratulate him on his appointment to the new Department of the Marine. As has been said by Senator Manning, there is no other Member of either House of the Oireachtas who knows as much about fisheries as the Minister. I have no doubt he will apply that dedication to the specialised industry in his new Department and we wish him well.

We realise that the Bill before us arises from a court decision and it is a technicality but for a land locked county like Tipperary we would have problems in trying to relate fixed engines to nets. However, we have to accept the decision of the court and the Minister's reasons for the legislation. He points to the fact that the legislation is needed as a conservation measure. Anyone who talks to fishermen — and he does on a daily basis, I am sure, and I do occasionally — knows that they consider themselves experts in fishing for salmon in the sea. They tell us we seem to have all our facts and figures wrong in regard to conservation of salmon, that is, salmon that get into fresh water.

In my constituency, in particular, we have one of the well known salmon fishing rivers, the river Suir, and the Blackwater is not too far from us, either. The number of salmon available in those two rivers last year was extremely high and it was also extremely high off the coast last year. It was a bumper year for salmon off the Waterford coast, in particular. Talking to the fishermen down there who fish in the legal period, they are of the opinion that salmon come in cycles and that the level of fishing that is done around the coast bears no relationship whatsoever to the number of fish that eventually get into the rivers. They have told me — and I listened intently to their views — that the only thing that ever stops salmon from going into fresh water is the diminution of the level of fresh water in our salmon fishing rivers and that goes for all the rivers of this country. The Minister, Deputy Wilson, referred to this last night in dealing with the tourist aspect of fishing which is of vital importance.

We have within our jurisdiction some major trout and salmon fishing rivers which are still at a very high level of environmental control and as the Minister said, we have a responsibility to protect that environment and pass it on. As well as rivers, we have lakes, but we have a level of pollution creeping into our inland rivers now which is of extreme concern to all of us. The fishermen around the coast will tell you that if we looked after our rivers better with regard to the level of effluent discharge and effluent pollution the number of salmon would increase. They say that the fishing taking place off the coast has no bearing on it. That is their view but obviously they have some vested interests in being allowed to fish off the coast.

That brings us into the whole area of the debate that is going on about monofilament nets and all the other fishing nets that are available. Those of us who live inland would not know anything at all about that, although the river Suir is tidal as far as Carrick-on-Suir and I am sure that some amount of fishing takes place there as well. If we paid more attention to the kind of effluent that is discharged into our rivers, whether by agricultural works which recently in my own constituency created problems, the discharge from silage could be used for re-cycling. If it is collected properly from the silage pits it can be used safely and be fed back to cows with benefit to the overall milk production. If attention were paid to this matter the amount of effluent escaping from silage would be drastically reduced and the pollution taking place in our fishing rivers would also be reduced.

We also have a certain level of factory effluent and semi-State factories have not been exempt from responsibility for the tragedy of pollution of our rivers, which has created quite an amount of fish kill in South Tipperary. I hope the Minister, as a result of this Bill, will stay in constant touch with his colleagues in the Department of the Environment to see that the Water Pollution Act is operated in the strictest possible way to ensure that both indiscriminate and accidental effluent discharge is controlled. Then we will have a major up-turn in the numbers of salmon and other fish in our inland rivers.

The Minister has said he has had discussions and will have continuing meetings with the regional fishery boards. All members of fishery boards whom I know or talk to have expressed concern, this year in particular, about the resources that are available to them. The Minister asks them, within the limits of the resources available to them, to stamp out all illegal fishing. With the resources available to them, it is their opinion that their ability to stamp out illegal fishing is greatly reduced this year. Perhaps the Minister would discuss this particular aspect with them, because they are extremely concerned that they are constrained this year in trying to stamp out illegal fishing.

All of us would agree with the responsible view that has been expressed recently when bailiffs or law enforcement agents of the State, trying to do their duty, were inhibited from so doing by a minority of fishermen. We all would defend the right of our law enforcement agents to do their job. We would also like to make sure the Minister provides sufficient funds for them to carry out their work effectively and efficiently. There are large stretches of river which need to be patrolled and visited on a regular basis, otherwise we are only paying lip service to this whole concept of ending illegal fishing.

The fishing industry is a major industry. It is one of which we should be very proud. Our salmon are world famous — whether fresh or smoked. That anglers can have the pleasure and the sport of fishing for large fish like salmon in our inland rivers — is something we must be very careful about and for that reason the Minister will have the widespread support of this House for the Bill. However, I hope he will take on board some of the comments made in the other areas which also concern us, to ensure that this important industry which is now under the jurisdiction of the Department of the Marine, will get the attention that it needs.

The industry has obviously been neglected. With our accession to Europe and the fact that Spain is now a member of the European Community, the problems that can arise for our fishing industry have increased — and I think that is being kind to our colleagues from Spain who have entered the Community. They have a larger fishing fleet than the whole of the Community put together and because of that they are naturally more active and operate in greater numbers around our coasts. It is important that we have the fullest support of the State to defend for our fishermen the rights that have been achieved for them in the Community. There have been debates about the level of support that has been given to them in the past. I welcome the fact that we have the full support of the Navy and the gardaí and all the other enforcement agencies to ensure that the livelihood of fishermen is protected, that fishermen who indiscriminately break the law will be taken to task and that people who pollute rivers to the extent that it damages that industry will also be dealt with under the appropriate legislation. I welcome the Bill.

Mr. M. O'Toole

I just want to add my voice briefly to the debate on this legislation. While it is a very short Bill, nevertheless it incorporates a definition of a fixed engine which is in its own way a curtailment of the existing fishery laws that are in operation to date. I agree with those Senators who have already spoken about pollution. It is detrimental to fish life and every effort must be made to ensure that our rivers are not polluted any further. ACOT and the people who are involved in agriculture must ensure that any project, silage slab or slatted house that is being erected at present must conform to regulations so that the effluent from these houses is no longer let run into water courses and rivers which adjoin many farmer's lands. Many farmers live close to major salmon rivers and in future a provision like this must be built into the grant-aiding of facilities for silage making, silage slabs and slatted houses.

The curtailment of pig slurry from piggeries is very important. Our legislation is very loose in regard to this. It is a pity that grants which were available for the proper protection of the effluent that flows from these buildings are no longer available. Farmers are not in a position to invest substantial capital in the protection of fisheries. It is not their field. Substantial moneys must be made available if we want to curtail the pollution that is happening daily and which will eventually get into rivers because of the absence of proper tanks for slurry.

In the past draft and driftnet fishermen along our coasts were blamed for the lack of fish in our rivers. Many angling associations blamed driftnet fishermen for stopping fish coming in at the mouth of rivers. That is a myth and I want to scotch it here and now. The amount of fish taken by driftnet fishermen, whether at the mouth of rivers or a mile from main rivers, is minimal when compared to the amount of fish being taken by international trawlers who steam inside the 12 mile limit area at night. These international fishermen take huge hauls of salmon to their factory ships which are outside the restricted limit area and they process the fish on board. There is no regulation in force to deal with this illegal operation which is taking place along our coast. The State protection team cannot protect us from that type of poaching of our waters by international boats. I am well aware that this is happening because when I go out fishing I can see a mass of ships waiting until dusk so that they can speed into the salmon fishing areas, take their hauls and return outside the restricted area where they can transfer the fish to their factory ships without paying the Government any levy. We do not know exactly the size of the hauls but it is well known that hundreds of thousands of fish have been taken from our waters by this method.

Small driftnet fishermen along the coast have been blamed for the lack of fish in our waters and of course this is not so. I know fishermen who have been in the driftnet business for many years who are now no longer pursuing that activity. This is evident from the number of licences in operation at present. I am sure the Minister is aware that many of the licences that were in operation up to ten years ago are no longer being used because driftnet fishing is no longer a profitable business. More money can be made from fishing for lobster or crayfish along the coast rather than fishing for salmon.

This is minor legislation and refers only to the definition of a fixed engine. I want to ensure that it does not curtail driftnet fishermen any more than they have been curtailed in the past. While I welcome the new Department more exploration and detection work should be carried out outside our 12 mile limit to curb the activities of those type of fishermen I have mentioned who are very seldom brought before the courts because our protection fleet are unable to curb them. I ask the Minister to do all in his power to ensure that the continuation of that type of poaching will not ruin our waters for the future.

There is a tourist attraction in the area of flyfishing. We have many miles of waterways and good salmon and trout fisheries which are not being utilised at present. These may be restocked but, until such time as this intrusion by international fleets is curbed, there is no way fisheries can be controlled. I ask the Minister to take particular notice of this international intrusion into our waters. It should be his first concern. Because of advanced technology these fishermen know exactly the streams and rivers the fish traditionally come into in the spring and they are able to detect them and take them onto their factory boats. This is the major difficulty in relation to the protection of our waters. The amount of poaching done by our traditional fishermen at present is insignificant compared to the amount of damage being done by international fishermen. I appeal to the Minister to look at this.

Mr. McDonald

I will be very brief. I should like to take this opportunity to wish the Minister of State every success in the great task that lies ahead of him. It is important that the Department should continue to develop the fisheries industry. It has always proved to be a difficult sector but, nevertheless, it needs more inputs and new technology to ensure that, as an island nation, we are able to reap the greatest possible benefits from our national waters.

I come from the midlands and I am not directly involved with sea fisheries, drift nets or anything like that. It is surprising to note via the media that certain people engaged in fisheries seem to place themselves above and outside the law, and this is a great pity. I hope the Minister and the Minister of State will do all they can to ensure that laws already enacted are observed. There is little point in strengthening the legislation we have, or in enacting additional legislation, unless it is possible to ensure that that legislation is enforced for the good of the population as a whole and for the good of the industry and the national economy. That is very difficult in this area when individuals, whom the papers say are breaking the existing law, do so by applying physical and brute force. That is an extraordinary situation and I hope the Government will tackle that problem head on. We cannot have anarchy or allow any sectoral interests to decide what they want to do, or to place themselves above the laws enacted by the Oireachtas.

I wish the Minister success with this important legislation — small as it is with two sections — and I hope justice will be done. The Department have a huge task in building up the fish stocks to ensure that the industry prospers and expands and it can only be done with co-operation. I hope the key word will be cooperation with all sectors involved. Otherwise the Minister should lay it on the line very firmly that the law must be upheld in this regard and that adequate resources will be put at the disposal of the State agencies who are assigned this difficult task. I hope there will be cooperation and that people who are endeavouring to make a livelihood from the fishing industry will increase their incomes one hundred fold. The few people who want to do exactly what they like, irrespective of the law, must be dealt with. I know the Minister is a man with great experience and a great tradition in this area and he will be able to deal with the related problems with fairness and justice and, above all, with determination and strength.

Mr. O'Callaghan

Like previous speakers I too extend a sincere welcome to the Minister and subscribe to the points made by other Senators. This legislation is of significance only as it relates to a facet of the difficulty being encountered in the whole drift net industry off our coasts at present. I have sympathy for the Minister in his efforts to confront this problem because it is an arena of confrontation at present. He is almost like Macbeth. When he steps in, whether he goes back or forward in this confrontation, people will disagree with him. That is a phenomenon that is nothing new to Ministers, you cannot be all things to all men.

I do not want to appear to be the devils advocate but this is a classic confrontation. It is an ugly confrontation in many places like Helvick, Unionhall or off the Donegal coast last week. This is not a normal phenomenon for Irish fishermen. It is not the kind of thing they have done in the past.

Fishermen are the stock of rural peninsular communities and, quite often, are island people. It is not their normal modus operandi to go around bashing bailiffs or involving themselves in confrontation with the gardaí or the naval forces. This problem has developed and it has been allowed to develop. Because of the proliferation of driftnet licensing over the past 15 or 20 years the Minister now finds himself virtually with his hand in a hornets' nest.

In 20 years' time this House may be debating the demise of the Atlantic salmon which could probably be described as the most magnificent creature in the sea. We must decide whether we will grasp this nettle or whether, as has been suggested in some parts of this country, we should legalise monofilament netting. This suggestion has been made by responsible people. It is not a nonchalant suggestion. The Minister should contemplate legalising monofilament netting and then control it. The parallel is almost as simplistic. To ask a developing farmer to go back and start ploughing with a pair of horses is almost parallel with asking our fishermen to fish off the coast — with the kind of competition confronting them from the international trawling fleets of other EC countries, in the main, and Eastern bloc countries — with netting other than monofilament netting.

The suggesting has been made that we should legitimise the use of the net completely. It is extraordinary, for example, that the State collects VAT from the importation of monofilament netting and yet it is illegal. I know people will say it is legal for other uses, but the reality is that the bulk of the imported monofilament netting is used for illegal fishing. That is one side of the story. The other option is that we could do as the Canadian Government and recently the Icelandic Governement did buy out the owners of driftnet licences and perhaps contemplate going back to some form to draft netting which is a relatively inefficient form of fishing which tends to be the preserve of a few. Eventually the Minister will have to opt for one or other end of the spectrum because I do not think we can continue to have both. We will continue to have confrontation; we will continue to have difficulty; we will continue to have law breaking.

I concur with my colleague from County Mayo, Senator O'Toole, that in the middle of all this confrontation a large percentage of legitimate licence holders are trying to eke out a living. I am aware of two licence holders who live quite close to me, one of whom has stopped fishing altogether in Bantry Bay because it does not pay him any more. Last year he caught something like 57 salmon altogether. Years ago he would catch that number in one morning before his breakfast which of course confirms what others in the conservation area would say. Despite the peak and valley phenomenon that is abroad in the salmon industry last year, as Senator Ferns remarked a moment ago, appeared to be a very good year in some places. That does not alter the fact that bays and estuaries and rivers that traditionally had a lot of salmon swimming through them do not have any now. I refer to Bantry Bay in my own area. Three of the rivers going into that bay were deemed to be amongst the finest salmon fisheries in the province and they have not had a fish killed there for the last four or five years. This of course is grist to the mill for the conservationists. I do not find it difficult to agree with them.

That does not alter the fact that we have island and peninsula communities dependent in the summer time, on fishing. They have no other form of income in the main, except the income from drift netting. What do we say to these people? Do we say: go back to the prehistoric form of fishing where you may or may not catch fish, or use the efficient system of fishing whereby they can be guaranteed a catch most of the time? The argument the fishermen have put up of course is that if there is a legitimisation of monofilament nets, they then would agree to stringent controls. It is debatable what fishermen will agree to at any time but, for example, there was a time in this country and it is not a thousand years ago when very few if any fishermen fished on a weekend, especially on a Sunday. It was regarded as sacrosanct. It was regarded as fundamental to the wellbeing of the resource that the salmon be given some opportunity to go up the rivers on weekends. I understand that they would be prepared to seriously respond to that overture and they could conceivably agree that proper control of licensing and of nets a better result could be achieved than the situation we are confronted with at present. I am not suggesting to the Minister that I am necessarily in agreement with that point of view but is one that is being put forward by people in the fishing industry at present. We cannot however, unfortunately, lose sight of the fact that we have a sizeable river and lake angling industry, which brought in in excess of £30 million to this country last year. Is is tragic to read the reports of regional fishery boards that fishing on river after river, estuary after estuary and lake after lake is slowly coming to a halt to the extent that many of them did not see a fish killed there last year.

As I said at the outset can we continue to adjudicate over a situation like that where this magnificent resource will be gone from us in 15 or 20 years time? Despite the fact it was a great season last year, we cannot go on indefinitely killing the fish at source and not allowing the salmon to get back up the river to where they spawned the first day. This is the classic problem that confronts the Minister and I suspect that at the end of the day the only acceptable resolution will be to compensate the fishermen in a proper way and induce them to get into other forms of fishing — as many fishermen are trying to do.

We may be headed off at the pass, as it were, in any event by the fact that we have so many salmon ranches on this island even at present. In my own home town in the past few days a sizeable salmon ranch has commenced operation and they will be producing hundreds of tonnes of salmon per week. Of course that does not alter the fact that the traditional attraction of the Atlantic salmon as a wild swimming species can never be overstated. It is indeed a phenomenon of up market restaurants on the Continent to have specific insertions on the menu, and for two considerably different prices you may have farm salmon or free flowing salmon. It is an indication of the importance that should be attached to that resource.

I have great sympathy for the Minister and he is probably in need of much sympathy. It is a very onerous and difficult task and anybody who lives in a fishing community as I do, would know the vehement debate that this can conjure up at any given moment. It is a difficult one. I wish to raise one other point before I resume my seat, and you might indulge me on this a Chathaoirligh — the Leas-Chathaoirleach was indulgent to Senator Kiely a moment ago — and allow me to touch on the problem of red tide which is very relevant for the Minister's Department. Red tide is a very serious problem at present in the south west region where we have sizeable tracts of water in Cork Harbour closed for the extraction of shellfish at present. We have a sizeable resource in Bantry Bay in the form of something in the excess of £3.5 million to £4 million of a mussel crop which appears to be at risk from this phenomenon of the red tide. I suggest that the Minister should with all expedition dispatch some people from his own Department to reside for the next six or seven weeks in the area where this phenomenon appears to be active during the months of July and August. We should not have to depend on The Cork Examiner or RTE or anybody else to be giving us information which we do not know to be accurate or factual on the day and where people are told that it is inadvisable to eat shellfish taken from certain harbours and so on. I think that this is a total and absolute responsibility of the Department of the Marine and this can only be achieved by providing a permanent resident marine biologist from this Department, who can speak with effect on behalf of the Department. We would then see in the public media a proper reflection of the actual situation and not the meanderings of some people who set themselves up as experts. Again I welcome this measure taken by the Minister to close off this loophole as stated in the opening paragraph. It is overdue and I wish him well in his office.

Minister of State at the Department of the Marine (Mr. P. Gallagher)

At the outset I thank all of the Senators for their very kind wishes on my appointment as Minister of State. Needless to say that I will take decision that will be in the best interests of the industry generally. I also thank the Senators for their very constructive contributions and I must say that I was extremely impressed with the very keen interest shown by the Senators who contributed to the debate and their knowledge of the salmon fishing industry.

I wish to refer to a number of points made by the various Senators commencing with those raised by Senator Maurice Manning. A number of the points made by him were also made by other Senators in their contributions on salmon conservation, the regional fishery boards, their funding, management, their development and promotion of inland and sea fishing generally.

I accept there were cutbacks in all Departments and every Minister and every semi-State body and the regional boards suffered as a result of the cutbacks, but I think I should point out that the regional boards are not financed directly by the Department of the Marine. We finance the Central Fishery Board and they in turn finance the regional fisheries boards. In 1986 the total grant to the Central Fishery Board was £5.022 million and this year it was £4.813 million, a drop of some 4 per cent. I certainly think that should be increased because the Central Fishery Board have statutory obligations and we must ensure that we give them sufficient money to do this. We have asked them to do their utmost and work within these financial constraints in order to ensure that they can stamp out illegal fishing to the best of their ability. They of course have a back up from the Naval Service and from the Garda Síochána. The role of the navy is twofold. First, to protect the fisheries outside our 12 mile limit and second, to assist the protection staff of the regional fisheries boards inside our 12-mile limit. We would like to think they are available all along the coast at all times within the 12-mile limit. However there must be a sense of proportion. The navy have over the years done excellent work, bearing in mind that they have a vast area of sea to patrol right out to our 200 miles limit. However, they have apprehended very many boats outside and indeed a number of boats inside the 12-mile limit. In my own county there was a case before the courts on the very day we had a debate in the Dáil some two weeks ago. A number of the minesweepers are decommissioned now and the Minister, Deputy Daly, has made a case to the Community for assistance towards surveillance and hopefully the position will improve in the years to come.

Fishermen have a very important and key role to play in the management of our fisheries. They appreciate fully that fish is a renewable resource and we must ensure that fisheries do not continue to overfish. There are a number of conservation measures, the most important of which was referred to by a number of Senators, that is, the weekend closed season. As Minister of State at the Department I pointed out on numerous occasions before the season started in the debate in the Dáil, and I will take the opportunity in this House this evening to reiterate that I have no mercy whatsoever for weekend fishing or for what is very prevalent in certain parts of the country, end of season fishing. End of the season fishing does not give an opportunity for fish to get up the rivers. That is problem No. 1, and there is the other direct economic disadvantage in that the fish that are landed and sold at the end of the season are sold at almost 50 per cent of the market price. That has an effect not on the price at the current season but on the price in the following season. We must protect not only the fishermen but the fish processors and smokers and ensure that this practice will be stamped out. I am sounding a warning in this House that end of season fishing and weekend fishing will not be condoned by me, by the Minister, by the boards or any officials of my Department. That is the most important one of all, and there the fishermen themselves can play a key role.

We had some difficulty in a part of the country which happens to be in my county last weekend. During last week I appealed to the fishermen in that country and throughout the country to refrain from weekend fishing. I am delighted to be able to report that last week very few boats, if any, were out. The fishermen respected this request. Some speakers mentioned that a small percentage of irresponsible fishermen can tarnish the image and reputation of the many responsible fishermen along our coast. We should bear this in mind. I assure the Senators that I share their concern about the future of the industry.

Senator Manning referred to conservation and suggested that we look at the position in Canada and Norway. I suggest that if we were to compensate the drift net fishermen that could be very costly. This has proved to be so in Canada. However, it has been partially successful. This and the other measures referred to are under consideration by the salmon review group. We hope to have their report available to us in a few months, and I assure this House that we will act on it at the earliest possible date because none of us wants a recurrence of what happens every year. I hope the incidents which we experienced recently have been a lesson to all right down the coast because the season will go on longer the further south we go. The people concerned in those incidents learned a lesson and all others similarly involved will be treated in the same manner. On that Saturday evening I issued a statement condemning these activities and said that we would tolerate no attacks on our law enforcement agencies. I assure the House that if there are any further such attacks we shall certainly deal with them.

Senator McDonald referred to the legislation, which is quite simple but very important. I assure him this will be enforced immediately it is enacted after it passes through this House and is signed by the President. He referred to the attacks on the law enforcement agencies, and I think we are all at one on that.

Senator Ferris mentioned the end of season, and I have stated that we will not tolerate that end of season activity. He also referred to the importance of trout and salmon angling to the tourist industry. That can continue only providing that we allow enough fish up our rivers. At this stage I would like to pay tribute to the many angling associations throughout this country who are responsible for the restocking of many of our rivers. While there is no monetary return to them, they have a deep-rooted interest in the industry and I take this opportunity to thank them.

Another very important question raised was that of pollution. If you, a Chathaoirligh, will bear with me I will dwell on this for a few moments. The responsibility for water pollution would fall primarily within the jurisdiction of the Department of the Environment and the local authorities under the Local Government (Water Pollution) Act, 1977. The protection of fishing waters from pollution and poisoning is provided for under sections of the Fisheries (Consolidation) Act, 1959. The regional fisheries boards are responsible for the protection of fisheries and fish-bearing waters under the Fisheries Act, 1980. They usually prosecute pollution offences detected by them under these sections. The maximum penalty on summary conviction is £500 or, at the discretion of the court, imprisonment for any term not exceeding six months, or both such fine and imprisonment. The regional fisheries boards submit reports to my Department in respect of each individual fish kill which is reported to them. The causes of fish kills originate from various sources, notably poor farm practices in regard to the storage and disposal of animal slurries, silage effluent, pesticide wastes and industrial activities. The Northern and North Western Regional Fisheries Boards, insert advertisements in the local papers circulating in their respective areas reminding farmers who are planning to make silage of the need to ensure that they have proper facilities for the disposal of the effluent.

I will give the House a few facts. The number of prosecutions initiated by the regional fisheries boards in respect of pollution offences in 1984 was 63, in 1985 it was 73 and in 1986 it was in the region of 72. Therefore, the regional fisheries boards, the local authorities and the Department of the Environment are doing their utmost in this respect. We have impressed, and will continue to impress, on them the necessity of ensuring that there is no further pollution as far as possible.

I listened with interest to Senator O'Toole who has some evidence of fishing outside the 12-mile limit by foreign vessels. I will be only too pleased to have further details from him at some stage and I hope he will be kind enough to give them to me. I remind the House that for some days past spotter planes have surveyed the west coast. I have no reports back as yet but I am sure that if those boats were there we will receive reports on them in more precise detail than Senator O'Toole may have. Certainly I will be interested in obtaining any details he can give me.

I accept what Senator O'Callaghan says, that it is not normal that the irresponsible minority are tarnishing the reputation of the responsible majority, and I mentioned that earlier. He said he has great sympathy for me because I will be very much in the firing line. I am glad of any sympathy but I do not need it. I think the fishermen have realised in the past few days that I am working in their best interests and it is for that reason that I will do my utmost to stamp out weekend and after season fishing.

The thorny question of monofilament nets — it is a thorny question — is one which is being considered by the salmon review group set up by the former Minister, Deputy Liam Kavanagh. The review group will be reporting to us in a matter of months. We will take the decisions which we feel are right for the country, as they concern the draft net, the drift net, the loop net and the angling associations. The Department of Tourism and Transport will also have an input in this area. Decisions will be taken which will be in the best interests of the country.

Senator Kiely referred to pollution which I have dealt with. He also raised two important matters. First, there was the question of red tide which is very topical at the moment. I will take this opportunity to outline to the House the present position in this regard. The red tide is known as marine algal blooms or acquatic algal blooms. There are many different species of unicellular organisms and these are capable of blooming explosively, given the right conditions of water circulation and temperature increase. Unfortunately, those conditions prevail in the Cork harbour area at the moment. These blooms fall into three main categories, consisting of species which kill fish by gill clogging and asphyxiation or choking and may also have a mildly irritating effect on human skin; a species which, if consumed by humans, could give rise to persistent diarrhoea and will also kill fish by choking and species which, if consumed by humans, could cause paralysis and will also kill fish by choking.

My Department provide services to three sectors, namely, finfish farmers, shellfish farmers and regional health authorities at their request and with their co-operation, their interest being health care while our interest is the protection of the farmers and the securing of their trading credibility. Roinn na Mara have been providing this service since 1984 and indeed lesser services since 1976. It is important to point out that samples are received daily at the fisheries research centre at Abbotstown from all around the coast and our laboratory is equipped to do the necessary tests.

In relation to Cork harbour, it has been confirmed that red tide is in that area. There will be no further taking of shellfish from this area until my Department can confirm to the health board that this bloom is gone. That may take some time. Many of us will have pressure exerted on us to try to ensure that these fish can be taken and can be exported. All we can do in our Department at the moment is to ensure that no licences are issued for exporting purposes. I understand the Southern Health Board are in a position to ban any movement from that area.

We must act responsibly and take all the necessary steps. I pointed out the effects that these species can have on human beings. There is a high risk of PSP in shellfish. Any pressure which may arise will not deter us from taking the necessary steps in the long term interest of the industry and indeed of our exports. I hope that, as was suggested by Senator O'Callaghan, the Department will be in a position to keep the public informed about this matter and the Southern Health Board from time to time.

The question was raised as to the steps which are being taken in relation to the importation of eggs or young fish. Since 1972 the importation of live fish and the eggs or young of each fish has been prohibited except under licence from my Department. In addition to the health status of the fish being imported, it must be certified by the relevant authority in the country of origin on the basis of criteria set down by my Department. Juvenile fish are examined at source by my Department's fish pathologist to establish their disease-free status before importation can be allowed. As an additional precaution, all materials involved in the transporting of imported fish must be destroyed. It is my intention to encourage the relatively new fish farming industry to become fully self-sufficient at all levels of production as soon as possible, thus virtually eliminating the need to import young fish. I assure Senator Kiely, if he has any fears in relation to importation, that all the necessary steps are being taken to ensure that no diseases are transmitted.

I hope I have answered most of the questions raised by the various Senators. In conclusion, I would like to take this further opportunity, at the risk of repeating myself, to appeal in the middle of the salmon season, to all our fishermen to bear in mind that we are dealing with a renewable resource, to respect the law enforcement agencies, to respect the weekend closed season and to bear in mind that fishing during the weekend or after the end of the season will not be tolerated by me, by the Minister or by the Department.

Question put and agreed to.

Bill put through Committee, reported without amendment, received for final consideration and passed.

An Cathaoirleach

Before we take the item on the Adjournment of the House will the Deputy Leader indicate to me when is it proposed to sit again?

Mr. W. Ryan

On Tuesday next at 2.30 p.m.