I, too, would like to welcome this Bill and I would like to compliment the Department of the Marine and the Minister. I agree with some of the remarks made by previous speakers that it is overdue but it has come at last. I would like to support a few remarks made by Senator Murphy, in particular his concluding remarks about the suitability of Cork as a proper and fit location for this new Institute. I would also like to join with Senator Murphy in the complimentary remarks he paid to University College, Cork, and the work they are doing in this area. Similarly, I would like to compliment the Marine Research Station in Sherkin Island, headed by Matt Murphy, who works with me in the coastal management committee which is a sub-committee of Cork County Council. Matt Murphy is a pioneer in research and had done excellent work, together with his family in Sherkin Island, over the past decade or more. In particular, he has held a number of international conferences in Cork which focused attention in the right direction as far as this Institute is concerned.
I would also like to compliment our own coastal management committee in their endeavours to provide some finance, little though it is, for the provision of an educational facility to be commenced throughout the coastal towns in Cork for the promotion and education of students to make them aware of the benefits of mariculture and aquaculture in particular.
I was born on the shores of Bantry Bay, the son of a fisherman. With the development of the mussel industry and the provision of salmon cages Bantry Bay has become the mariculture capital of Ireland. The position with the fishing industry in general is that it was for many years, at least three decades, the poor relation of the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries. This was unfortunate. If we look at statistics we see that we have 25 per cent of EC waters and yet we get 4 per cent of its catch. It is an astonishing fact that an island with major potential has been neglected by successive Governments.
This institute can be of particular benefit. I will be parochial in view of the problems in the Cork region. We have had on a regular basis the rape of our waters and fishing stocks by large international trawlers for many years. In many instances these trawlers are not from EC countries. Vessels of Spanish ownership are being apprehended by our protection vessels and are brought ashore. The reality is that the numbers of foreign trawlers brought into our ports and that have to face the rigours of the law for the breach of our national waters represent just the tip of the iceberg.
All around the coast the new institute has a role to play. I refer to the situation with regard to the salmon industry. I am particularly concerned that there is an ongoing clash and that serious incidents have occurred off our coastline when salmon fishermen have been brought to the notice of patrol vessels. A solution must be found to this problem. On one side there are the inland fishery people who feel there are not enough wild salmon coming up the rivers. They are concerned, and rightly so, about the possible adverse effect this can have on our tourism and on the economy. It is internationally recognised that except for Scotland there are few, if any, rivers or clear waters in Europe where salmon are still available. We are fortunate in Ireland that we have many such rivers and this is something that we must preserve. The proper scientific and technological approach by this new institute can only enhance and encourage the development of our estuaries and rivers. It is a known fact that there is massive potential, particularly for the tourist industry, in ensuring that rivers are properly stocked and keep pollution free.
It is an appalling fact that over the past decade or so we have had a number of serious instances of pollution in our rivers from industrial sources. Sometimes farmers are responsible for the discharge of effluent, such as silage and in other instances local authorities have been guilty of polluting our rivers and harbours. This must be curtailed. I welcome the efforts of the Department of the Environment who are currently ensuring that pollution is kept to the minimum. Much of this pollution was due to lack of knowledge and lack of scientific back-up. In this respect I believe that the new institute will have a vital role to play. I would congratulate the environmental department of Cork County Council on their efforts in this regard. We have an excellent environmental officer, Brian McCutcheon, backed up by a team of 18 or 19 people, and they are currently embarking on efforts to try to minimise the pollution of our rivers, etc.
Again I may be a little parochial, but I am concerned that over the last two or three years we had this famous "greening" of the River Lee. There seems to be conflicting views about the causes and effects of such greening. The reality is that it is a relatively new phenomenon and it is one that the new institute will have a role to play in ensuring, possibly in co-operation with the local authority, that this is properly investigated. We are assured by the environmental experts that so far as the fish stocks and indeed the water from the River Lee, the drinking water etc., are concerned, there is no adverse effect revealed by the greening, but it is an area that must be looked at. This is one of the most important waterways in Europe. By proper research and pinpointing the source, this greening can be eliminated and overcome.
In regard to salmon, there is the ongoing conflict about whether or not monofiliment nets should be legalised. I accept that as the law stands the monofilament net is illegal. But the reality is that in my area — and I speak for most of the coast of County Cork and parts of Kerry — and from my experience and knowledge of the fishermen concerned, no other net is used. I have great sympathy for the genuine onshore fisherman with a vessel of possibly 30 or 40 ft., half deckers and, possibly, open boats, who have licences and who are trying to eke out a decent living. The problem arises with the big vessels — indeed, in some instances they are not Irish vessels — eight, ten, 15 or 20 miles off our shores with seven and eight miles of monofilament net catching thousands of salmon. It is they who are really doing the damage.
This is an aspect that must be addressed. In fact, if we take the argument further, I believe that we must learn from the endeavours of people like the Canadians and, the Norwegians, who have made great efforts to preserve the salmon stocks and have done a lot of scientific and technological research into the development of the salmon industry in their areas. In this respect I believe that the new institute has an important role to play, because I am convinced that there is not sufficient research into the pattern of the salmon. We know a lot about that species, but one puzzling feature I could never obtain an explanation of was this. In 1986 and 1987 we had two relatively bad years off our coastline for the fishing of salmon. We had poor catches, resulting in enormous prices per pound being paid for salmon. Yet in 1988 — and this has baffled the scientists as well — we had record catches for that year around our coastline resulting in salmon prices falling as low as £1.60p per lb., probably less than half what was paid the previous year.
More research can and must be done to preserve our salmon stocks. The simple banning of the monofilament net and the disabling of approximately 80 genuine salmon fishermen along the Cork coastline, the largest in Ireland, will not in itself solve the problem. There is a view among the bona fide fishermen who eke out a living from salmon fishing that they are prepared to work a five day week and observe the law of the land, so to speak, providing they are allowed to use a certain limited amount of monofilament net, limited in length to the extent of not more than 800 metres and in depth to not more than 30 meshes. This was a proposal put forward by the coastal management committee of County Cork. It was a genuine proposal. Unfortunately, it is these people, these bona fide inland fishermen, who in most cases are, I will use the word "harassed" by the patrol vessels, and this, unfortunately has resulted in some relatively serious incidents around our coastline. I stress that the problem is not near the shore. It is not caused by the small fisherman who has been traditionally fishing the salmon, but it is caused by the larger vessels fishing with miles of net off our coastline.
Another problem I believe this new Institute can focus attention on, and hopefully remedy, is a new phenomenon occurring around our coastline and, I believe, not heard of until the last decade of the 1980s. I refer to the problem of wrecks along our shoreline. I will instance the Ranga, which came ashore off Slea Head and has lain there for many years on a nice sandy beach. It is a deplorable sight to the eye. One wonders where are we going in this regard. I will next instance the case of the Bardini Reefer, which in my view was scuttled in the harbour between Bere Island and Castletownbere, the second largest fishing port in Ireland. It is sticking up there. The mast is over water. It is partly submerged and is creating problems of access to and from the island for the island people and for tourists. It is also creating problems for the fishermen seeking to gain access to the port of Castlebownbere. This is a disgrace. It has been lying there for about six or seven years. Here is a case where this vessel came in, was abandoned and sank in the harbour. This should not be allowed to happen. The Institute has a role to play in the monitoring of traffic along our shoreline. Off the south-west coastline we have one of the busiest shipping lanes. There was the unfortunate tragedy of the Betelgeuse which claimed the lives of 50 people at the jetty of Whiddy Island on the night of 8 January 1979. That vessel was refused access to a European port and yet we allowed this vessel to dock. Apart from claiming 50 lives it crippled the whole industry of oil storage in Whiddy and was to sound its death knell.
Next I will come to the famous or infamous Kowloon Bridge, which arrived at my own bay of Bantry Bay. People may say I am being parochial, but Bantry Bay is the second best bay in the world. The Kowloon Bridge was granted shelter there. The massive vessel, carrying a cargo of semi-refined iron ore, lay in the bay for two or three days. It then took to sea and, fearing its floundering, the crew were airlifted from this vessel. The vessel was then careering around the Atlantic off our coastline and eventually took up residence on the Stags Head off Castletownsend. This vessel is no longer an eyesore; it is now totally submerged. But it lies adjacent to one of the richest herring spawning grounds around our coastline.
To come to more current matters, at the moment we have the unfortunate situation, again in Bantry Bay that adjacent to the lighthouse there is a huge Spanish trawler lying on the rocks. I wonder what is to become of it. I would urge the Department, the Minister and the new institute to consider policies for the patrolling of our waters. One of our seamen lost his life going to the aid of this trawler.
On the question of wrecks, we come to the current question of the Tribulus now anchored in Bantry Bay. Here again there is a conflict about what one does in a situation like this. The Minister was correct in his decision in allowing this vessel safe anchorage in Bantry Bay. There was no other bay or harbour around our coastline that could provide suitable anchorage for this vessel. Just to go back on the Kowloon Bridge, nobody seemed to know who owned that vessel. It cost the ratepayers of this country approximately £1 million. There is a lack of policy here. In this current situation we are a little more fortunate in so far as the Tribulus is owned by a reputable company, Shell, who have co-operated since its anchorage in Bantry Bay, with the Department of the Marine Officials, with the Department of the Environment, with the Cork County Council and with the local fishermen. They are doing everything possible to ensure that the vessel will be repaired and that it will leave Bantry Bay safely without the loss of lives and so on.
In Bantry Bay there is a very important mariculture industry, a multi-million pound industry, and there are other types of activities. Apart from scalloping, there is an excellent herring bed, and there is the salmon farming around Bear Island. There is a conflict here. Is Bantry Bay going to be continuously used as a haven, having regard to the fact that in every given instance there is every chance that the local indigenous industries will be jeopardised? Again, the Tribulus is a huge vessel containing as far as I am aware, raw ore. There was the fear for a number of days in Bantry — I lived with it also — that this vessel could have broken up. Luckily, it has not. The weather seems to be improving. If the vessel does break up we will have a serious problem. As I said, I think the Minister was right in his decision. The Tribulus was not in the same category as the Kowloon Bridge. It was a vessel that, due to adverse weather conditions, was allowed into Bantry Bay.
For the future, the Marine Institute and the Department must look at this policy. If there was major oil pollution in Bantry Bay it would wipe out the mariculture and aquaculture developments to date. I would hope that a set of policies and a set of criteria would be set down. It would be on the lines of the current situation. Shell immediately set up offices in Bantry and assured the county council and the Department that any damage caused would be fully indemnified by them. That was not the case with the Kowloon Bridge nor the Bardini Reefer. They assured the local fishermen, that in the event of any loss being sustained by them, they would be adequately and properly compensated. They assured the local community concerned with tourism and the ecology generally that any loss would be monitored. They brought in international experts who, together with the Department of the Marine officials, have ensured that any pollution to date — and, thankfully, it has been minimal — has been quickly mopped up. The problem posed by the abandonment of oil tankers or other large vessels in Bantry Bay, which might constitute serious pollution problems, must be addressed.
On the question of aquaculture and mariculture generally, the institute can play a role in the proper development of this futuristic and economically important industry for the State. After the Gulf-Chevron pull out in Bantry a few local people, by trial and error, decided to experiment with the farming of mussels. In the first two or three years they learned by their mistakes. If they had had the back-up of the Marine Institute, with experts who could help them with research and scientific data and knowledge, many of the mistakes would not have been made. In the first instance they put out rafts. Unwittingly, they did not realise that, because of the effect of the Gulf Stream and the warm waters coming off the mouth of Bantry Bay and so on, the mussels would grow to maturity and to a state for processing in so short a time. It was generally believed that this would take somewhere in the region of 15 to 18 months. The pioneers in mussel development in Bantry Bay learned to their surprise — and, I suppose, initially to their loss — that this was to cause problems, because most of the rafts sank with the weight of the mussels. They then moved on to the long line system, which has proved enormously successful.
I would like to compliment the Department of the Marine on their efforts over the past number of years in helping and supporting the mussel industry in the Bantry Bay area, My view is that there are still some teething problems, possibly due to overintensification of farming causing a poor meat content in the mussel and a slower growth. This can be resolved by proper research and scientific knowledge. Along our coastline from Malin Head to Mizen Head there are opportunities for development. I am using the mussel industry by way of example rather than regarding it as being the exclusive type of industry there. There is potential also for scallop farming, clams, oysters, etc.
The value of these industries to our economy is that they look to 1990 and the next century. There is great potential, and the new institute will have a significant role to play in the back-up of such industries. Going back four or five years ago, the mussels coming from Bantry Bay alone kept a factory in Scotland who processed them, and employed 40 people, going almost 12 months of the year. We have since then come a step forward in that we are now, thankfully, processing a certain percentage of these mussels locally.
That is the type of thing — and it was touched upon earlier by Senator Fitzgerald — we should also have a fresh look at — the bringing ashore of our natural indigenous products. Senator Fitzgerald referred to other species of fish. For many years — and it is still the case — about 80 per cent of the catches coming into Castletownbere were taken by lorry out of the country and processed abroad. That is an unfortunate situation which must be remedied. As Senator Fitzgerald said, in many instances, through lack of knowledge or scientific back-up, a lot of the fish that came ashore deteriorated and left our country in less than satisfactory condition. These fish should be processed here. We should look to the improvement of the quality of the fish being landed. In the mussel industry at present we have a problem of crustaceans on the mussels. This is a sort of growth. It does no harm to the actual food of the mussel, but from a presentation and marketing point of view it is unsightly and has created problems. It will continue to create problems until it is resolved. With proper scientific research and back-up this can be overcome.
On the question of competing with our European partners, the French have designed and pioneered another type of mussel farming. In Bantry Bay our mussels are mainly long line; in Wexford we have the dredging of mussels, which is a different system; but the French have gone a step forward in so far as they now have developed and pioneered a system whereby long line mussels can be anchored and submerged about 30 feet under the sea surface. The advantage of that is that one can farm mussels in deeper and less sheltered waters than, say, the inner harbour of Bantry Bay. The whole purpose of the submerging of these lines is, I understand, to minimise the effect of wave power and swell, because, apparently, the higher you are on the water the more friction is caused and the more damage to mussels. There is potential for the development of new techniques, and this is where this new institute has an important role to play. The important thing about mariculture, aquaculture and mussel farming is that there are no "mussel mountains". There is a potential market in France and throughout Britain for the mussel grown off our coastline because of its quality etc. We must research this area because in the future there is potential there for job creation and economic development off our coastline.
As mentioned earlier by Senator Murphy, there is an ongoing debate, which has not yet been resolved, about the problems being created by the farming in cages of salmon and sea trout, particularly in regard to what effect the farm salmon would have on the wild salmon population if they got loose. The argument stems from the fact that the salmon naturally finds its way up the river, whereas the farm salmon lacks this basic impulse. There is an argument that if the wild salmon were to mix with the fresh salmon it would create a deficient breed of salmon and would cause problems for the future. The institute will have a role to play here in trying to ascertain what the proper approach is. There are a lot of myths about at the moment. Next door to my own bay in Kenmare Bay there is an ongoing battle between, on one hand, the local fishermen who want to promote and establish salmon and trout farms in the bay and certain other interests, who also may have a valid point and who feel that that would be undesirable in a scenic area such as Kenmare Bay. Both sides put forward very compelling arguments. However, I think that this new institute, with proper scientific research, could help to resolve that problem — a problem which, I feel, is just the tip of the iceberg. I believe it will escalate, but I hope a balanced debate can resolve the problem. Interestingly enough, I read that the Canadians, in relation to their fish farming, have devised a method whereby they do a lot of the farming of salmon upriver. They are released from the cages after a year or a year and half. They go down the river but eventually — and hopefully for the Canadians — find their way back into the cages. However, the success or failure of this remains to be seen.
I mentioned the problem of wrecks along our coastline which seems to be concentrated along the south-west coast. I fear it will become a long term problem. I would like to pay particular tribute to the Department of the Marine and the Minister for the handling of the vessel, the Tribulus, in Bantry Bay. I omitted to do that in my earlier remarks.
In relation to salmon farming, trout farming etc., I had the privilege of visiting the western isles of Scotland, where they are more advanced in their technology, know-how and experience than we are. If you go further afield, the Norwegians and the Canadians are indeed very advanced. The proportion of farmed salmon that is provided from Ireland is very tiny in comparison to what the Norwegians supply to the European market. Of course, in Scotland and the western isles, they have one very important fact in their favour. They had direct access to European funds over the last decade which enabled them to develop that industry.
As mentioned in the Minister's speech, we lack the scientific and technological advantage that the Norwegians, Canadians and Scots have. This is where this new institute has an important role to play. This applies across the board not alone to the mariculture and aquaculture scene. I may have concentrated on those, but I did not want to overlap points made by my colleague, Senator Fitzgerald, with regard to other species of fish.
There is a lot to be learned about the movement of the shoals of herring and so on. The Canadians, in particular, are continuing their research into this. That is another area, where, because of the lack of a marine institute over the last number of years, we have been at a loss.
Another area of importance under the umbrella of the Department of the Marine in which the institute can have a positive rôle to play is the whole question of coastal erosion. It particularly effects counties like my own, east Cork, and Waterford. This has been going on for two or three decades and successive Governments, in my view, have been inclined to ignore the problem. Research is required to establish methods to prevent or curtail the damage caused by coastal erosion. It is a problem which must be addressed.
The new institute and this Bill must be welcomed. I urge Senators on both sides of the House to realise the importance and necessity of the establishment of this institute. As I said earlier — previous speakers have referred to it — it is possibly overdue but now it is at hand I feel that this new institute will enhance the value of our entire fishing industry — and it is not entirely confined to the fishing industry. As Senator Murphy pointed out, there are several other aspects of it, but this new institute can go a long way towards redressing the imbalance that has existed because of the lack of technology and research.
I have confined my remarks to some areas in which I have particular knowledge, such as the mariculture and aquaculture industries. There is a great future for the entire fishing industry. I welcome the establishment of this institute. I feel that it can only do good for the entire coastal area, for the entire fishing industry and for the benefit of the economy in the long term.
