Tairgim go léifear an Bille Iascaigh (Leasú), 1953, den darna uair. Tá ceithre fadhbanna dá bhfuascailt ann trí leasú ar chuid de na hAchta Iascaigh.
Is feasach do na Teachtaí gur foráladh san Acht Iascaigh, 1939, líontóireacht bhreac is bhradán i bhfíoruisce a thoirmeascadh agus gur tugadh éifeacht don fhoráil sin ón gcéad lá den bhliain naoi gcéad deag ceathracha a hocht amach. Moladh an fhoráil sin go forleitheadúil ag dreamanna deontacha a bhfuil spéis faoi leith acu sa slatiascaireacht. Rinneadh dearmad, ámh, ar aon dream amháin i lár na tíre nárbh aon chúrsa spóirt acu an t-iascach ach an phríomh-chuid dá slí mhaireachtála. Tá cónaí ar na hiascairí seo sna hoileáin i Loch Riach ar an tSionainn. Maolaíodh an toirmeasc roinnt trí fho-dhlí a dhéanamh trí bliana ó shoin a thug cead dóibh líontóireacht éisc ghairbh a chleachtadh. Níor leor é sin lena gceart féin a thabhairt ar ais do mhuinntir Loch Riach; agus níor gha an toirmeasc ar mhaithe le iascaireacht na Sionainne i ngeall ar fhairsingeacht an locha. Níor thainictheas ar aon chás eile dá shórt agus tá an tUdarás Iascaigh sásta nach bhfuil aon chás eile ann.
Baineann fadhb eile leis an dlí faoi a gcaitear bearna a bheith i ngach coradh iascaigh. Ní féidir an dlí seo a chomhlíonadh sna stáisiúin leictreachais sna haibhneacha. Tá deis nua-cheaptha acu chun an t-iasc a chomharthú agus a ligint suas tar éis cuid acu a choinneál le díol. Má rítear Alt 3 den Bhille measfar an deis seo a bheith ina coradh iascaigh chun chríche an Achta seo.
Baineann Alt 5 le fadhbanna sa dlí maidir le aibhneacha, lochanna 7rl. a shábháil ar thruailliú ó nimh agus abhair eile urchoideacha. Tá an fhoráil nua níos amplaí agus níos dlúithe ná mar ar foráladh cheana. Síltear go mbeidh srian daingean leis an gcúis seo dochair don iascaireacht agus an t-alt seo ina dhlí.
Tá réiteach ar an gceathrú fhadhbsan alt seo. Míníonn an t-alt seo é féin.
This short measure deals with four separate problems quite unrelated to each other and, as the provisions dealing with these problems do not entirely speak for themselves, it seems best to take them seriatim and explain the nature of the problem and the manner in which the proposed legislation is designed to meet it.
Section 2 proposes to authorise the use of draft nets in certain cases by exception to the general prohibition of all net fishing in fresh water imposed by Section 35 of the Fisheries Act, 1939, and which came into effect as from the 1st January, 1948. This prohibition was primarily designed to conserve stocks of salmon, but strong representations have been made on behalf of the fishermen of Lough Ree in the River Shannon against the denial to them of their ancient right of netting for trout through a prohibition which, in the case in point, does not serve any useful purpose so far as salmon are concerned. The case made by the fishermen has been met, as far as was possible, under the original enactment by making by-laws which enable them to engage in netting for coarse fish, i.e., fish other than salmon, trout or eels, but this is clearly not sufficient to meet the situation. I am advised that the use of nets in Lough Ree with due regard for conservation of spawning stocks, would not result in any injury to the fisheries of the Shannon system as a whole. Lough Ree, as part of the Shannon system, is, of course, vested in the E.S.B. under the Shannon Fisheries Act, 1938, and I have accordingly with the concurrence of the Minister for Industry and Commerce, secured the consent in principle of the E.S.B. to the amending legislation now proposed.
It will be seen that Section 2 is drawn in general terms and not by reference to particular waters. For this purpose lakes of a minimum area of 30 square miles have been taken as it is only in such large lakes that commercial netting of trout can be undertaken without detriment to the maintenance of stocks. The E.S.B.is the only fishery owner having exclusive rights over such large bodies of water but the situation also has to be envisaged where a large lake might be the property of a number of individual fishery owners. It is only right that any such owner should have a deciding voice as to facilities to be given to the public in the fisheries under his control. This position is safeguarded by the provision that an applicant for permission to use draft nets for the capture of trout must furnish the consent in writing of every owner of a several fishery in the lake in question. Moreover, the provision under Section 4 of the Bill for the holding of a public inquiry will ensure that any person with an interest in particular waters will have an opportunity of registering his objections to any proposed permissive by-law. Finally, the general provisions of the Fisheries Acts as to publication of, and appeal against, by-laws are applied as a further safeguard for interested persons.
The need for legislation as set out in Section 3 has arisen from the situation in which the E.S.B. finds itself in regard to the salmon fisheries of the River Erne. For the purpose of constructing a hydro-electric works near Ballyshannon, the board found it necessary to buy out the valuable salmon fishing weir at Assaroe Falls as this lay in the path of the river diversion and tail race excavation. The board has, up to now, been unable to make any use of the salmon fishing rights so purchased and is naturally anxious to engage in fishing operations with a view to eventual recoupment of its outlay in this connection. What the board proposes, with the support of the Minister for Industry and Commerce, is that permission should be given for the taking of salmon in the fish pass erected at the Cathaleen's Falls dam. Under existing fishery law no fishing can take place in a fish pass and, as that prohibition must be maintained in regard to mill dams and similar structures throughout the country, it is undesirable to relax it in the present cases. Instead, it is proposed to regard the fishing device which the board proposes to install in the fish pass as a fishing weir.
The general provisions of the Fisheries Acts require that every fishing weir should have a free gap, and detailed provisions are laid down as to such free gap being situated in the deepest part of the stream, being of certain dimensions, and so on. It would be quite impracticable to apply such provisions in relation to the fishing device proposed in this case which will be no more than a trap installed in one of the pools of the fish pass. It is, therefore, proposed that the requirement as to a free gap should be dispensed with and that, as an alternative, the weir should be operated in accordance with conditions that would ensure the release upstream of a sufficient number of fish for the purpose of adequately maintaining stocks. In effect, what will happen is that each batch of fish entering the pool will be counted and a permitted percentage captured, the remainder being released upstream. An essential feature of this arrangement will be the exact counting of the numbers of salmon taken and released upstream respectively and it need hardly be said that such an arrangement lends itself to much more exact control over the maintenance of fish stocks than does the free gap system which depends so largely on chance.
This section, again, is in general terms and may be applied not only to any E.S.B. installation but also to weir fisheries which will be acquired by the State in due course in pursuance of Part V of the Fisheries Act, 1939. The provisions will be applied by Order and, as any change in the existing arrangements for securing the ascent of adequate numbers of fish for spawning purposes must be of concern to anyone with an interest in the fisheries of the river concerned, such persons are entitled to certain safeguards. The necessary safeguards will be provided in three stages, namely, by the holding of a public inquiry as provided for in the next section and also by the publication of a draft of any Order proposed to be made authorising the operation of a weir without a free gap, so that those concerned may know precisely what provision is being made for the safeguarding of spawning stocks and may make objection if they considersuch arrangements inadequate or in any other way unsatisfactory. Finally, every Order of this kind will be laid before each House of the Oireachtas where it can be annulled by resolution.
Section 4, which provides for the holding of public inquiries, has been referred to in connection with the two preceding sections and requires no further explanation.
Section 5 re-enacts in slightly different form the provisions of Section 26 of the Fisheries Act, 1939, as amended by Section 3 of the Fisheries (Amendment) Act, 1944. The need for reenactment arises from the fact that the first-mentioned section was repealed as superfluous by the Fisheries (Statute Law Revision) Act, 1949. Some doubts recently arose as to the precise effects of that repeal and the Attorney-General has advised that what was repealed by the 1949 Act was the substituted provision, namely Section 3 of the Act of 1944. In effect, therefore, these provisions in relation to the protection of waters from pollution have been inadvertently abrogated and it is now proposed to reinstate them.
Some difficulties have arisen in the past in enforcing the provisions for protection of the fish from pollution due to the fact that, while certain injurious substances such as lime or spurge were prohibited by name, other sources of pollution were not adequately covered. The section as now drafted prohibits the use of any deleterious matter for the capture, destruction or injury of fish and the expression "deleterious matter" is defined as meaning any explosive or any substance which on entry or discharge into the waters is liable to render the waters poisonous or injurious to fish, spawning grounds or the food of any fish. This may appear to be rather a sweeping provision inasmuch as many substances which in sufficient concentration are injurious to fish, are daily discharged from industrial plants and sewerage systems in such manner as to be quite harmless. To meet such cases, provision is being made for the grant of licences for the discharge of industrial and other effluents subject to conditionsas will ensure such treatment by way of cooling, dilution and so on as to render them harmless from the fishery viewpoint. The interests of industry will be safeguarded by consultation with the Minister for Industry and Commerce and those of local authorities in consultation with the Minister for Local Government.
The form of this section renders Section 36 of the Fisheries (Ireland) Act, 1850 (already repealed in part) and Section 7 of the Fisheries Act, 1924, redundant and these two enactments are to be repealed.
Section 12 of the Fisheries Act, 1925, provides that a person who holds a salmon rod licence for a particular year in a fishery district shall be entitled to receive a licence (known as an endorsement licence) for the same year in any other fishery district on payment of a reduced fee of 10/-. The Foyle Fisheries Commission, in licensing regulations made under the Foyle Fisheries Act, 1952, has adopted the same principle by providing a 10/- licence fee for any salmon angler wishing to fish in the Foyle area (which comprises the entire former Moville and Derry fishery districts) who already holds a licence for the same year in a fishery district. It is desirable that boards of conservators should reciprocate in this matter by issuing endorsement licences to holders of Foyle area salmon rod licences, but I am advised that this is not possible on a strict interpretation of the law as it now stands. The purpose of this section is to regularise this matter by giving the necessary wider interpretation to the provisions of the 1925 Act. I understand that legislation will also be introduced in Belfast to deal with the question of availability of Foyle area rod licences in Six-County fishery districts.
