Special Committee Wildlife Bill, 1975 debate -
Wednesday, 23 Jun 1976

SECTION 27.

Mr. Kitt

I move amendment No. 13:

In page 24, subsection (1), to insert " or while the severity of weather conditions which caused the suspension remains " after " order " in line 40.

This amendment was put down in the interests of conservation. As the Bill stands—subsection (1)—the Minister may by order " prohibit during such period not exceeding one month . . . the hunting of . . ." and so on. I want to point out that it is possible that severe weather would last longer than one month. Indeed I remember in the early sixties when it lasted longer than two months. This would affect wild fowl particularly in flooded areas where they would be very exposed due to severe weather conditions. That would endanger species in that area. That was the reason for my amendment.

Mr. T. J. Fitzpatrick (Cavan)

While I fully appreciate the sentiment behind Deputy Kitt's amendment, I think I would be able to convince the Deputy that there is adequate provision in sections 27 and 8 to meet his point. Subsection (1) of section 27, enables the Minister to suspend an open season order for a period not exceeding one month. Subsection (3) of the same section enables the Minister to extend the temporary suspension for a further period not exceeding one month. In other words, the first and second suspensions could span an aggregate period of two months but no longer. Bearing in mind that, generally speaking, the approximate duration of the shooting or hunting season is from September to January and that extreme weather conditions would be unlikely to occur before December, these provisions will be quite adequate to meet most situations. However, in the very unlikely event of extreme weather conditions prevailing beyond the continuous period of two months, then, under section 8 (2), which deals generally with orders made by him under the Bill, the Minister could revoke the open season order altogether. In the circumstances I am satisfied that the amendment is not necessary and I suggest that it be withdrawn.

Chairman

What was that last section mentioned?

Mr. T. J. Fitzpatrick (Cavan)

Section 8, subsection (2).

Chairman

I was concerned about that too because we had a disastrous situation arising in the slob lands of Wexford where the lands were so frozen the geese were literally shot on the ground; they were too weak to fly. It was a scandalous situation. Anyway, that is covered thank goodness.

Mr. Haughey

The Minister can revoke?

Mr. T. J. Fitzpatrick (Cavan)

He can revoke an open season order altogether.

Chairman

Close it off completely then and protect the species?

Mr. Haughey

You are talking about subsection (2) now. Subsection (2) is subject to subsection (3) which says that before you can do that you have to consult any other Minister of State, the Commissioners, a planning authority or any other body. One might not be able to do it as quickly as one would like.

Mr. T. J. Fitzpatrick (Cavan)

There is a very good telephone service.

Mr. Brennan

If it was dependent on the telephone service the Minister would need to delete the section altogether.

Mr. Haughey

I do not know what country the Minister is living in to have the audacity to say there is a good telephone service.

Mr. T. J. Fitzpatrick (Cavan)

I understand that our service is much better than in most countries.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. Haughey

This Bill might be important in that regard in so far as we might be resorting to carrier pigeons. But I am not so sure that the revoking of the entire order is envisaged under section 8, subsection (2). It would be a very cumbersome way of dealing with Deputy Kitt's point.

Mr. T. J. Fitzpatrick (Cavan)

Might I point out to Deputy Haughey that I am advised that subsection (3) would not apply here because I do not have to consult with anybody before making the order. Therefore, I would not have to consult anybody before revoking it. I only have to consult somebody before revoking an order if it were necessary for me to consult some person before making the order.

Mr. Haughey

The position is that, under section 27, the Minister can make an order which lasts for a month. Then he can make a second order.

Mr. T. J. Fitzpatrick (Cavan)

Yes.

Mr. Haughey

Most open seasons are from November to January.

Mr. T. J. Fitzpatrick (Cavan)

Yes, well that is most of the——

Mr. Brennan

Deputy Kitt is seeking the continuance of the order for the duration of the severe weather conditions. The Minister points out that it is not necessary to do that, that he can deal with it in other ways. Then why have the section at all?

Mr. Haughey

What Deputy Kitt is proposing is a useful safeguard. There is no harm in having a maximum amount of flexibility.

Mr. T. J. Fitzpatrick (Cavan)

I understand, in pursuance of a policy of consultation, we consulted various interests in connection with this section and that those interests are satisfied that the section, as it stands, is a reasonable one.

Mr. Haughey

On that score, it might have been a good idea to put into section 27—in fact, we might consider it on Report Stage—an amendment to the effect that in the operation of section 27 the Minister should first seek the advice of the Wildlife Council.

Mr. T. J. Fitzpatrick (Cavan)

I suppose that is one of the things the Wildlife Council would advise me on.

Chairman

There would probably be a monitoring anyway. It might not necessarily be just weather conditions. It might be a certain lack of food or something vital to migratory species. Therefore, weather might not just cover it. But section 8 (2) would give the Minister more flexibility and would not necessarily be related to weather.

Mr. Haughey

If the Minister makes an order, amends it and it expires after two months is he then required to make another order?

Mr. T. J. Fitzpatrick (Cavan)

No. I do not think so. The point raised by the Chairman is covered because subsection (1) of section 27 says:

Where the Minister is satisfied that because of the severity of weather conditions occurring in the State or elsewhere or for any other reason.

That would be an outbreak of illness or disease among birds or animals.

Mr. Haughey

If one order expires there is nothing preventing the Minister from making another?

Mr. T. J. Fitzpatrick (Cavan)

No.

Chairman

We do not want a repetition of what happened in the big freeze-up, when we practically lost most of our snipe population.

Mr. T. J. Fitzpatrick (Cavan)

If I thought Deputy Kitt's amendment were necessary and acceptable I would have no hesitation in agreeing to it.

Mr. Kitt

My amendment would give more flexibility to the Minister, especially given the option of having this prohibition for the duration of severe weather conditions.

Mr. Brennan

Supposing a spell of severe frost continued for six or seven weeks?

Mr. T. J. Fitzpatrick (Cavan)

That is covered because, if it is only for six or seven weeks, there is no problem. It is one month and I can extend it to another month. In view of the discussions today would the Deputy like to withdraw the amendment and raise the matter again on Report Stage?

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Question proposed: " That section 27 stand part of the Bill."

Mr. Brennan

Will there be other reasons for extending the open season?

Mr. T. J. Fitzpatrick (Cavan)

We have dealt with that in subsection (1).

Question put and agreed to.

SECTION 28.

Question proposed: " That section 28 stand part of the Bill."

Mr. T. J. Fitzpatrick (Cavan)

This section deals with the regulating of game shooting. It is self explanatory.

Chairman

It has been a subject of comment in the press in relation to tourists coming into this country who book into hotels, who overshoot and who do not have the same approach to wildlife as we have. We are more conservative in our attitude.

Mr. T. J. Fitzpatrick (Cavan)

That is a problem that has been with us for some time, the problem of visiting sportsmen. I dealt with that for the first time last year under an order which made it obligatory on guests to get permits from my Department. We shall be dealing with the matter in section 29.

Mr. Haughey

At present if a young chap wishes to obtain a licence for a .22 rifle, he must first get a certificate from a farmer indicating that he is free to shoot on certain lands. This can be an inconvenience in the case of young men, many of whom are in the FCA, who do not want a rifle for any form of outdoor shooting but who want it for target shooting purposes.

Mr. T. J. Fitzpatrick (Cavan)

I understand that the provision in regard to the .22 rifles Deputy Haughey speaks about is in the Minister for Justice's regulations. In this Bill, apart from that, before a person gets what is called a game licence it will be necessary for him to satisfy the issuing authority that he has in fact the right to shoot over land—that he either owns land or has permission to shoot over it. He does that by way of making a declaration. If he is a foreigner visiting here or if he wants to shoot deer he will have to get a firearm certificate and he will also have to get a permit or a licence from the Department of Lands to enable him to hunt. That is dealt with under section 29.

Mr. Haughey

The purpose of section 28 then is to confine the hunting with firearms of designated species to persons who have authority in regard to certain lands.

Mr. T. J. Fitzpatrick (Cavan)

Section 28 provides that in future licences to hunt game species will be available only to certain categories or persons qualified—persons with a bona fide entitlement to take game. The native Irisman will not have to produce written evidence that he owns shooting rights but he will have to make a declaration to this effect. We will be dealing with that more fully in section 29.

Mr. Haughey

Section 28 is an omnibus sort of section. The purpose of it is to restrict hunting of protected animals with guns to certain categories of people with a particular right over land.

Mr. T. J. Fitzpatrick (Cavan)

Correct, persons who own land or have the right to shoot over land.

Mr. Haughey

It is pretty wide. Who would be excluded?

Mr. T. J. Fitzpatrick (Cavan)

We want to try and exclude the poacher, the man who gets a licence for a gun and does not know where or what he is going to shoot, who is going to take a chance, go out, trespass and shoot anything he can find.

Chairman

To date the position has been that if you had a game licence you could shoot anywhere you liked provided the landowner did not detect you.

Mr. Brennan

That would be trespass.

Mr. T. J. Fitzpatrick (Cavan)

Technically speaking the present position in relation to licences is that there is a limited firearms certificate and an unlimited firearms certificate. The limited firearms certificate only entitled people to shoot vermin on their own land and the unlimited firearms certificate was commonly known as a game licence. The section is basically an anti-poaching section.

Question put and agreed to.