Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 4 Jun 1959

Vol. 175 No. 9

Committee on Finance. - Vote 47—Fisheries (Resumed).

Debate resumed on the following motion:

That a sum not exceeding £234,320 be granted to complete the sum necessary to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1960, for Salaries and Expenses in connection with Sea and Inland Fisheries, including sundry Grants-in-Aid. — (Minister for Lands).

Sir Anthony Esmonde

The Minister gave us a very extensive review of fisheries but two things struck me as being absent from his statement, in so far as it relates to sea fisheries. He has stated on previous occasions that there is a very rich harvest of fish off our coasts. He has also stated that we have a good export market. The gist of his remarks on sea fisheries was that if we can build up a stronger sea-going fleet, then everything will be all right. Does it not strike the Minister that there are two reasons why this state of affairs does not obtain here? Mr. Whittaker's Programme for Economic Expansion, which is published by the Government, states the need for better harbour facilities for fishery purposes. It also states that a review is being carried out by a Continental expert to ascertain whether those better facilities should be provided.

In the Minister's long statement, covering a good many pages, he made no reference whatsoever to harbours or to what the Continental expert had advised. Before people can be encouraged to invest their money in fisheries, in private enterprise which really is the ultimate aim in development as against State development, they must feel confident of protection. I understand that the Government are devoted to private enterprise — or so they have often told us. There is only a very short statement relative to the protection of fishery grounds.

The Minister must know that although there are increasing quantities of fish off our coasts there is considerable anxiety among fishery folk with regard to the inroads made on those grounds. I do not necessarily mean to imply that overseas fishermen are coming inside our territorial waters as they exist at present. What must be made crystal clear to the Minister by those who represent the fishery association and such Deputies as represent maritime constituencies is that these foreign trawlers with their extensive modern, up-to-date equipment, are doing considerable harm to the spawning grounds.

Those seem to me to be the two vital features connected with the development of our deep sea fishery industry. The Minister, to my knowledge, having gone through his speech and listened to the greater part of it, did not refer to these things. Admittedly he referred, ensemble, to territorial waters. He indicated he thought the Minister for External Affairs was introducing legislation soon to deal with the new rule or base territorial line but that does not make any vital contribution towards our difficulty. Nobody will invest considerable sums of money in an enterprise unless there is sufficient protection. We protect our industries here. Why can we not protect our fishing industry as well?

I am always told it is quite impossible for us to take any action on our own. I know that any action that might be taken is not a matter for this Minister directly. It would be more a matter for the Minister for External Affairs to initiate legislation or to take whatever action might be thought desirable. But the Minister, as the Minister for Fisheries, as one who has espoused the cause of fisheries and is directly appointed to that task, has direct responsibility in the Government. If he is to develop fisheries they must be fully protected.

There have appeared in the past couple of years off our coasts considerable shoals of herring. The Minister knows that as well as I do. He has been told it often enough or he sees it in the papers. The general tendency towards fishery development in the world as a whole has produced a greater and more up-to-date type of craft. I understand they are using a new type of netting which sweeps the floor bed and is highly injurious to spawning grounds. In addition, it frightens the fish out of the area altogether.

Another season will have come and gone before another international conference is held. This is a matter of vital interest not only to the people I represent in a maritime constituency but whom my colleagues also represent, particularly on the South-East coast or in other maritime constituencies. Another herring season will have come and gone before we have another conference. Briefly the position is that it is estimated by those who can get the information that there are approximately 1,000,000 tons of fish off the coasts of Wexford and Waterford. It is also estimated that in the past two years 220,000 tons of fish have been caught there and that the greater part of that amount of fish has been caught by foreign trawlers. It is further estimated that the heavy rate of fishing in the area where the majority of these fish are is bound to have an injurious effect in the destruction of the spawning grounds and the modern equipment is likely to drive the fish away.

I should like the Minister to bear in mind as well that the reason these foreign trawlers are off our shores is because we have one of the few really fertile fishing grounds left in the North Atlantic. Iceland has another. They still have considerable quantities of fish and they have spawning grounds as well. Perhaps if you want to seek a fertile fishing ground after Ireland you will have to go as far South as the Canary Islands. The demand for fish and for processing fish is very heavy. There is an ever increasing number of trawlers as a result of the investment of capital in this industry in other countries. Naturally they will come to those places where the fish are.

I am a member of the Council of Europe. I am a member of the Committee of Agriculture of the Council of Europe. Recently we had a discussion in Committee and in the Plenary Session in Strasbourg on the subject of fisheries. I raised this matter in Committee. Fifteen nations took part in the discussions. I put the Irish point of view as I am putting it to the House now. I pointed out that we have the fish here and that, on our present territorial waters basis, dangerous fishing is taking place on the very edge of our territorial waters where the spawning grounds are, mainly, and that there would be considerable destruction of these grounds. In other words, I made it clear that, by leaving us as we are without an international agreement they, in effect, are killing that fishing area. I pointed out that they were destroying the fish and other amenities as well.

I met with considerable sympathy in that Committee. No dissenting voice was raised among all the other people there. They suggested to me to bring up the matter again at the Plenary Session, which I did, under the same conditions, and again no dissenting voice was raised. I did not bring up the matter by suggesting we should deny our responsibilities and depend on territorial waters because I was not in a position to do so. In the first place, I was not speaking for the Government and, in the second place, as a result of Parliamentary Questions asked in this House, it was obvious to me that the Government did not intend to take any direct action on the matter. What I did bring up at this international Assembly was the suggestion that the United Nations should be asked to take an early decision on the matter of territorial waters.

The Minister must know that two conferences have taken place. As far as my information, which I believe to be correct, goes, it is really only a matter of whether they can reach common agreement, if all countries are agreed that it would be desirable to extend territorial waters to six miles. A great many of the countries consider that the extension should be to 12 miles but they cannot reach general agreement on that matter. Whatever the rules of this conference are, they apparently cannot get international agreement unless everyone is in full agreement.

That brings me to another point. The major portion of our marketing of fish is to Britain. Fishing conditions have changed somewhat in Britain from what they were heretofore. The British Navy, that is, the Royal Navy, the permanent force there, existed always on the reserve personnel from the fishing fleets. Fisheries were very largely subsidised and received huge sums of money. The controlling head was usually a retired admiral who had considerable experience in those matters. In those days, it was necessary for Britain to secure permanent personnel to man the boats in times of emergency. Things have since changed. There is not the same demand for sea personnel as heretofore, with the result that the British industry is not as heavily subsidised as before. Therefore, there is a large potential not only for us but for every country in Europe, in the export of fishery catches to Britain. That seems to be the position at the moment.

In the light of these facts, it does seem to me to be reasonable to suggest, and I am submitting it to the Minister who is the member of the Government associated with fisheries as part of his collective responsibility, that there seems to be no reason why we should not have a bilateral agreement with Britain with regard to our territorial waters. We would not be breaking a treaty with anybody by doing so. Exactly the same thing happened with regard to the Faroe Islands. They agreed to an extension of their territorial waters, but it would be to the interest of both countries if we extended our waters. We have fish; we want to protect those fish and to develop our fishing industry.

Mr. Childers

On a point of order, I do not want to interrupt the Deputy, but apart from the value of having a territorial limit, I have absolutely no responsibility for devising a treaty between this country and Great Britain. It is a matter for the Minister for External Affairs. I cannot deal with the matter at all.

Sir Anthony Esmonde

With respect, I made it absolutely clear that I know that it is the duty of the Minister for External Affairs to make that decision, but the point I am making is this: as the Minister is the Minister in charge of fisheries and has a collective responsibility in——

An Ceann Comhairle

Collective responsibility does not arise on an Estimate. It is only the individual responsibility of the individual Minister that arises on the Estimate.

Sir Anthony Esmonde

I quite agree with that, but the case I am trying to make is that Britain wants fish and that we have fish. We can catch the fish if we are protected and that is the interest of the Minister and the responsibility of the Minister. I do not see anything in the Minister's statement today to suggest that it is possible to expand on those lines, unless he thinks in the direction I am thinking now, but as always, in deference to the Chair, I shall not discuss the point any further.

I shall go now to the question of harbours. We have no harbour in County Wexford which is fully protected from winds. We have one or two harbours which may have protection against winds from a particular direction but they are vulnerable, at the same time, to winds from other directions. If we are to expand our fleets and to be able to go into deep sea fishing, which appears to be the ideal at which the Minister aims, we shall have to provide harbours for our fishermen. Otherwise, we shall concentrate our fishing boats in the one area. There is no deep sea anchorage from Dublin to Waterford, that I know of anyway, and unless you concentrate fishing fleets and fishing personnel in particular areas, you will not expand the fishing fleet. If there is a rich harvest around our shores and all that potential for the development of that type of industry, surely this is one of the things that require not delayed action but immediate action.

The Minister has now been in office for two years. I believe that he is doing his best to develop the fishing industry, but why is there always delay? Why is it, when you have a White Paper issued by a Government in which it says that one of the potentialities for increasing our economy is the further development of our fishing fleets, that no substantial sum of money has been allocated? Why have there been no plans for developing our harbours? If we are to start fish processing here, we shall have to concentrate on the area where the fish are. Already there is one fish processing factory in the country. As far as my knowledge goes, it is in Galway and there are no fish in Galway at all.

The Minister stated that there was a pilot scheme for fish in, I think, Dunmore East, or somewhere like that, and that it had been tried out. Now as I read his report, I see that it is to be moved to Kinsale. Perhaps I am wrong in that, but certainly you cannot put the cart before the horse. The first thing you have to do is concentrate on the catching of the fish, on the exporting and processing of the fish, where the fish are, and to do that, you have to provide the facilities where the fish are. I see nothing in the Minister's statement to suggest that he is paying due attention to any particular area whatsoever. I cannot really see anything in the Minister's speech — and I am referring to deep sea fishing — to suggest that there is any likelihood of any great development in deep sea fishing.

True enough, there is a sum of £25,000 for an additional fishing boat which has been questioned by Deputy Dillon this afternoon. The Minister indicated that it is for the purpose of sounding out where the fish are. It does not make sense to me that we should want a boat specially for the purpose of finding out where the fish are. We saw what happened recently. We had the fleets of the world off the east coast. One of the trawlers — I think it was a German one — operated its Asdic sounding apparatus and discovered where the fish were. It sent out the information on its wireless and that brought in the other fishing fleets which picked up the message. Why do we want to spend that money on an experimental boat? It may be that there are other reasons for it but if it is solely for the purpose of locating fishing beds, then I think the money could be spent on something else.

Before I leave sea fisheries I want to say that if this Government are really serious with regard to the development of the sea fishing industry and really mean to make an exhaustive drive to give considerable employment and to encourage private enterprise to invest in it, I do not think there is anything like a sufficient sum of money available as matters stand at present. I stand subject to correction on this matter. When replying perhaps the Minister will say where the fish are and what are his plans for the immediate development of that area.

As far as inshore fisheries are concerned, the development of that potential to aid tourism by stocking lakes and so on, I think some progress has been made. What Deputy Dillon said is perfectly true. Deputy Dillon started that, but the Minister has made a good effort to work along those lines and encourage fishing as much as possible. I am particularly glad to see that coarse fishing is being developed in this country, but I think an effort should be made to eliminate entirely destructive pests such as pike. The damage they can do is untold.

I am fortunate to own a small lake of three or four acres myself. I have plenty of small trout in it. The lake has been there for a great many years. I have had to do nothing with it. It is always reasonably supplied with trout because there never has been coarse fish in it yet. It would be desirable to eliminate coarse fish from our fresh water lakes as far as possible. That applies not only to pike but to perch and other fish. They can do absolutely untold damage. As Deputy Dillon said, they can destroy in one afternoon as much fish as you could put into a lake in 12 months. A 12 lb. pike could account for a four lb. trout without any difficulty. Any action the Minister takes in that regard will be welcome.

Cormac Ua Breisleáin

Ba mhaith liomsa cúpla focal a rá ar an mheastachán seo, meastachán atá ag baint le tionscal na h-iascaireachta, tionscal a gcuireann muintir na Gaeltachta suim mhór inti. Tá fhios acu gur chabhrigh an tionscal seo go mór leo le blianta agus go mba é a leas é má thagann méadú agus leathnú ar an tionscal sin san am atá le teacht. Chuideodh sé go mór le deireadh a chur leis an imirce.

Ním comhghairdeachas leis an Aire agus le hOifigigh na Roinne as ucht an sár-obair atá á dhéanamh acu le blianta agus na scéimeanna a chuir siad ar bun. Bhí lúcháir mhór orainn go léir go dtáinig an tAire go Tírchonaill, agus thug sé uchtach do na daoine a chuireann suim sa tionscal mhór seo. Ó ghlac sé cúram na Roinne tá obair thabhachtach déanta aige leis an tionscal seo a chur ar aghaidh.

There is no industry of greater interest to us who reside on the western seaboard than the fishing industry. We have at our hands the raw material in profusion for the expansion of what should be one of our main industries in this country. As everybody knows, especially those living on the western seaboard, an expansion of that industry would mean a reduction in emigration and more employment in areas where industries are few and far between. The fishing industry can create employment, add to the national wealth and stem emigration, something that is very desirable as far as the congested areas and the Gaeltacht areas are concerned.

At the outset, I should like to congratulate the Minister on his excellent report on what he terms a highly productive service, namely, the fishing industry. His approach to the problems of this important industry since he took office has been stimulating and, as I have already said, his efforts have been welcomed by fishermen and those who have an interest in the expansion of this industry. His visit to the western seaboard some months ago was welcomed. It is pleasing to note that many of the points raised by the fishermen have been dealt with. These points were very varied, dealing with the provision of new boats and various arrangements in Donegal, for instance, the provision of beacons and pilot lights at the approaches to our smaller harbours and other matters that have been a source of trouble and annoyance to the fishermen engaged there for many years. We are glad that these points are at last being dealt with, and the fishermen are grateful for the interest the Minister is taking in their problems.

We were very glad to see that last year in Donegal we had one of our best herring seasons for many years. Other parts of the country participated in that harvest as well as Donegal. In the course of the debate here some Deputies mentioned the fact that herrings had the unfortunate habit of disappearing very quickly and appearing again in other places where they were not expected. Although there may be no good reason for their disappearing in that way, fishermen feel that they disappear because the waters in which they have been spawning have been over-fished. Perhaps that is the reason they have left the English coast and suddenly appeared on the Irish coast. It would be a grave disappointment to all of us, and particularly the fishermen concerned, if as a result of the overfishing of Irish waters, which I am afraid has taken place at some of the ports on the east coast, the herring would disappear from there as quickly as from the English waters.

Deputies also mentioned the question of the fishmeal factories and the fact that they were not in full production. We in Donegal were very glad that the fishmeal factory at Killy-begs was not occupied fully or even for part of the time during this season. That meant that the fishermen were getting, and are continuing to get, better prices for their herrings and had not to resort to the fishmeal factories where the price offered is indeed very small. If we were to depend on the fishmeal factories to keep our fishermen fully occupied, I am afraid the industry would fall to pieces on the western seaboard. As everyone should know, fishmeal factories are not the foundation stone of a much needed expansion of the herring industry. What is needed is an export market and in that connection I must again congratulate the Minister on the efforts he has made in obtaining markets abroad for our herring fisheries.

I am glad also that interest is being taken in the development of lobster fishing. Certainly, people in the West of Ireland and in the Gaeltacht areas of County Donegal should benefit, because as the Minister said, the smaller economic boats are suitable for that type of fishing and these are available on all the islands along the coast. I hope the people will take full advantage of the lobster fishing which can be one of the most lucrative ends of the industry.

I trust the Minister will remember that when in Burtonport, Kincasslagh and Bunbeg some months ago, he was told by fishermen in all these places of the necessity for the establishment of processing plants and canning stations at the smaller harbours. This would go a long way towards helping the industry and would take care of any gluts that might take place from time to time. It is one of the facets of the industry that have not been dealt with yet in a serious way by the Department and I hope that in the coming year something will be done along that line.

Very little was said on this occasion regarding the poacher who does so much harm to the salmon industry by taking a salmon now and again from the rivers. I agree that everybody in the Dáil would set their faces sternly against the organised type of poaching that has grown up here over the last five or six years. Everything that can be done to deal with that type of poacher should certainly be done. Poachers do great harm to our rivers and the full rigours of the law should be employed to deal with them.

Another facet of the salmon industry is the netting in our estuaries. That, I believe if pursued, can be a system of poaching very detrimental to the future of the rivers. If poachers at one end of the river do so much harm and should be dealt with, I think some steps should be taken also to ensure that the owner of the salmon fishery will give a guarantee that he will not over-fish the estuary. The decline in salmon catches in many rivers is due to over-netting and there does not seem to be any way so far as I know of dealing with these people who are ruining their own property and a very valuable national industry.

I am glad that the inland fisheries have come so much into the picture in recent years. When Deputy Dillon was Minister he very rightly gave this precedence as one of the finest assets to our tourist trade and I am sure the present Minister thinks along the same lines. Every help should be given to people to fish our rivers and lakes. Schoolboys should be encouraged to take up this type of sport because it would mean in years to come the development of an industry that would be of great value.

Mr. Moloney

The Minister in introducing this Estimate referred to imports. I think that was a development about which quite a number of Deputies were rather surprised. People, especially those not intimately acquainted with the fishing industry, take the view that the problem is to get a market for the fish caught in our waters and that there is little or no question of any deficiency arising. It is rather disturbing to hear from the Minister that we have a little import problem also. I think the greatest danger that faces the industry is connected with that import problem. In the first place it leads to irregularity of supply and, as the Minister has pointed out, it upsets the continuity of an estimate made on the home market.

I think it is about time that a serious examination were made of the reason for imports of fish, particularly at certain periods of the year. There are, I think, two reasons. The first is that our fishermen have not been prepared in the past to exert themselves as much as might reasonably be expected by going quite a distance out to sea and staying there for some days to get the fish and bring it back in large quantities as foreign fishermen do. The second reason probably is that we have not the necessary facilities for cold storage of fish when obtained in abundant quantities. The industry is one that has been built up after many years' hard work by successive Governments and if we have now reached a stage when we still have a problem with regard to supply I think it is time we should handle it.

A number of Deputies have pleaded that canning stations and processing plants should be erected at certain fishing ports. I wish to add my voice to that plea. I was rather disappointed that the Minister made no reference today to the possibility of installing a quick-freezing plant at Dingle. That equipment has been promised to Dingle port for a number of years and while some progress has been made — to the extent that a site has been obtained and conveyed to the ownership of An Bord Iascaigh Mhara — no further steps have been taken to install this plant. A number of Dáil Questions elicited information from the Minister which indicated that the supply of fish at Dingle did not seem to be sufficient under present circumstances to warrant erection of such a plant. I am glad to learn, however, that the Minister has made provision in the current year's Estimate for the amount of money necessary to install the plant. I have been informed locally that there are reasons for supposing that the supply of fish is not sufficient in Dingle to warrant the erection of a plant. The absence of a plant to some extent has brought about that state of affairs. The information I have from the fishermen is that when there is a supply of fish which cannot be marketed, the fishermen find themselves obliged to accept an uneconomic price. It has been suggested that a plant should be made available which could take this fish into cold storage and in which it could be processed, and that a general standard price should be obtainable at various periods for catches.

There is a lot to be said for the setting up of smaller plants in the line of canning stations which have been recommended here by other Deputies. I do hope that when the Minister is taking action in that connection, the small fishing ports in county Kerry will not be lost sight of, particularly Dingle, which is a well-known port and which has been dying because there are no local industries and the sea port business has been in decline for years. Such an industry, even a small industry of the type suggested here, would be a welcome asset to the town of Dingle. I hope the Minister will see that every effort possible will be made to erect this deep freeze station which has been expected at Dingle for a number of years.

The Minister referred to the unsatisfactory results in regard to the recruitment of trainees as boat skippers. One would have expected that, with the very big problem of unemployment, the recruitment of these trainees would have been regarded as a good opening for young lads of 17 or 18 years of age. The scheme was well publicised and I am rather surprised that, with all these advantages, only a dozen candidates or so presented themselves for training. It is a well-known fact that when boys of a similar age have gone into comparable employment abroad, they found themselves in receipt of substantial remuneration. I have made inquiries in fishery districts from fishermen and their sons as to why the younger boys were not inclined to apply for the training that was available through this scheme. The argument was that in the first instance the payment being made to trainees was not sufficient, and in the second place, the future of fishing was anything but bright.

The first argument falls flat because the rate of pay made to these trainees who are really only apprentices is considerably more than would be given in any industry or trade. As regards the second argument, this pessimism about the future of the fishery industry as a whole is to be regretted. We must all agree that the industry has at least been holding its own. Certain sections of the industry might have a recession from time to time, but in other sections, you will find there has been considerable advance. Perhaps progress has not been very spectacular, but any industry which shows gradual progess as this industry has been showing is one that holds a future to some extent for those people who are prepared to go into it. It is especially important that the sons of fishermen should be induced to go forward for training under the scheme. They have certain advantages that boys outside fishing areas would not have and eventually when they have completed their course of training, they should make very good fishermen.

I am particularly glad the Minister referred today to the question of cooking. I hope the Minister will be able to make some arrangement with the vocational schools to impart the necessary instruction in this connection. The people who are engaged in the hotel business and catering generally seem to know very little about how fish should be cooked. A foreigner to whom I was speaking some time ago and who has a good knowledge of this matter told me that no matter how efficient our organisation or our marketing arrangements were, two things were necessary. The first was that we should maintain a fairly regular supply of fish and the second, which was actually more important, that we would have to train housewives and hotel cooks in the correct way to cook and serve fish. I am glad the Minister has found it possible to deal with that question of which we have been losing sight in the past.

The Minister also referred to the Cong hatchery and rearing station. The people in the South of Ireland have long been expecting some development from the Department of Fisheries in that connection. I am not quite clear as to the full line of activity that will be undertaken by the Cong hatchery and rearing station, but from the very title it appears to be exactly what some areas in the South, where fish is a very important part of the local economy, have been expecting for some years. Perhaps there is scope for further expansion in that connection and if there is, I exhort the Minister to remember the interest the southern fishermen have in having established such a hatchery and rearing station.

Deputy Blowick referred to the effect arterial drainage seems to have on the fishery potential of a river. I am afraid I cannot agree with the Deputy. From my information, the damage is not as drastic generally as seems to be complained of by fishermen in the west of Ireland. Part of my constituency is adjacent to the River Feale which was drained under the Arterial Drainage Act and I have the authority of certain fishermen to say that the damage generally caused is not too extensive. It has to be admitted, however, that some damage was caused and the arterial drainage section of the Office of Public Works has some responsibility to local fishermen and I should like to enlist the Minister's assistance in this connection.

Valuable salmon pools which were in the river in question for a number of years disappeared largely after the drainage work was carried out. Since then, repeated applications have been made by local angling associations to the Office of Public Works for a renewal of these pools. So far, no action has been taken in the matter and, to that extent, fairly considerable loss of salmon has been caused. It is suggested that if the pools that disappeared could be remade or partly remade in the river, it would lead to a considerable increase in the number of salmon and a consequent improvement in the returns of fishermen.

The Minister referred to one very particular aspect of fishing. He indicated that steps had been taken to deal with bog pollution. The effluent from boglands has been causing a good deal of trouble in fishery rivers. Local people are convinced that considerable damage has been caused. The Department was rather slow to accept that that was the case. It is satisfactory that it has accepted it at long last and that steps are about to be taken to correct the matter.

One thing that impresses me in regard to the fishing industry in general is the volume of public co-operation that is forthcoming. I refer, particularly, to the fact that in recent years fishermen have come together and formed responsible angling associations. At one time, such angling associations were merely protective associations to focus attention on imaginary grievances and to protest where people were prosecuted for illegal activities. Thank goodness, that is no longer the case. I was very happy to have the opportunity recently of being present at the annual meeting of an angling association. The general trend of the proceedings showed a radical change from the position that obtained ten or 15 years ago. The angling association impressed me very much by the manner in which it conducted its annual meeting and their realistic approach to the problems presented for consideration and genuine offers of co-operation with the central authority and the boards of conservators with whom they have to deal.

Mr. Dillon

Not all within the Inland Fishery Trust.

Mr. Moloney

I was just coming to that. I think Deputy Dillon for the reminder. Local angling associations, generally speaking, were not aware of what important organisations such as the Inland Fishery Trust and Bord Fáilte and other bodies of that kind were doing for the fishing industry up to a few years ago. Because of the fact that they have had occasion to come into contact with these bodies, there is a different spirit prevailing, a spirit of co-operation which was so long absent from this whole business. In the matter of sea angling, there is a marked advance due to local co-operation, backed up by the technical assistance available from Bord Fáilte. In Dingle, which is part of my constituency, a most successful sea angling festival was held last year. The festival is being held again this year. A most energetic committee have already got to work, they have collected prizes, have made first-class arrangements for the carrying out of the festival and have already attracted a considerable number of entries. We cannot have too many of that type of festival. Such festivals attract outside people into this important industry of fishing.

Finally, I should like to endorse wholeheartedly the appeal made by Deputy Blowick this afternoon with regard to access to fishery resorts such as piers or rivers. That is very important and I congratulate Deputy Blowick on referring to it. Unfortunately, the roads leading to such places are, on the whole, not in good condition. I do not know why that should be, but, generally speaking, it is almost impossible to find a road leading into a fishery pier or river that is in good condition. I would join with Deputy Blowick in appealing to the Minister to work out some scheme with the Department of Local Government to have such roads classified and given priority for such grants as tourist grants or county road improvement grants. Personally, I think such roads should qualify for tourist grants.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

It is a matter for another Minister, not for the Minister for Lands.

Mr. Dillon

It seems to me a matter for the county council.

Mr. Moloney

A previous speaker was allowed to make the case and I am merely following what he said. I have not gone beyond that and, if he was in order, I want to add my voice. I sincerely hope that the Minister can do something in that connection. I am merely asking the Minister to make representations to another Department. I am not dealing with another Department. Surely there is nothing wrong in that.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

It is not in order.

Mr. Moloney

I accept your ruling, Sir.

Mr. Carroll

I regret I was not here for the Minister's speech. I assure you that I shall be very brief and I hope the matter I want to deal with will be in order. All that the Minister has done to increase the consumption of fish is very laudable but for some time past I have been asked to table questions on the subject of the price of fish. It would seem that in the first three months of this year, a considerable quantity of fish was imported to the Dublin market. Although the fish came from Holland, it was sold at a price 100 per cent. cheaper than the price at which our own fish was sold.

Mr. Dillon

That is a little extreme — 100 per cent. cheaper.

Mr. Carroll

The difference between 3/6d. and 7/- would work out at that percentage. I have listened to the 9 o'clock news from Radio Eireann giving the prices of fish on the Dublin market. I have heard brill and turbot being quoted at 1/- and 1/3d. In most of the fish shops around the centre of the city on the same day, the price was 5/6d., 6/- and 6/6d. The price of mackerel was quoted in the market report as 5/- and 6/- a stone and I have paid 3/6d. for three mackerel. On making inquiry, I was informed that there would be no fewer than 28 mackerel to the stone. There, you have mackerel at 5/- to 6/- per lb. I myself paid 3/6d. for three mackerel. I mentioned mackerel, but in January, February and March filleted plaice was 7/6d. per lb. Yet that plaice, imported from Holland, was as low as 3/6d. per lb. in the market.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I wonder would the Minister have any responsibility for the retail price of fish?

Mr. Dillon

He has. He controls the import of fish.

Mr. Childers

I have no responsibility at all for the retail price of fish.

Mr. Dillon

But the Minister controls the import of fish.

Mr. Carroll

There is obviously need for intervention on somebody's part to remedy the present unsatisfactory situation. We are appealing to the people to eat more fish. At the same time, we are denying them the opportunity of eating fish even on Friday. I know little or nothing about the fishing industry, but I do know what is happening both with regard to the price of fish and with regard to the availability of fish, even in coastal counties. In Ennis, for instance, it is difficult, if not impossible, to get many of the fish I have mentioned.

I received a complaint some months ago from an outstanding fish merchant in the City of Dublin. A contract had been accepted for the export of two tons of eels. The firm got in touch with the E.S.B. In their storage tanks there was an abundance of eels. Yet, though that firm were prepared to pay 1/- per lb. more than was being received from other buyers, they were told they could have only one cwt.

I prefaced my remarks with the qualification that I know little or nothing about the fishing industry. Nevertheless, I know that there are complaints. I know that there are factors which are militating against the poorer sections of our community consuming fish. That is particularly true of Dublin city. I hope that, apart from what he has done up to now, the Minister will endeavour to ensure that in future there will be no justification for the exorbitant prices charged for fish in the City of Dublin.

Mr. Childers

This debate has been a very friendly and a very helpful one and I do not think there is very much that I need say at this stage. However, I should like to deal with the suggestion made by Deputy Dillon that the policy of encouraging larger boats may destroy the inshore fishing industry. I have no intention of destroying the inshore industry. Neither do I think that the introduction of 60- to 80-foot middle water trawlers will have any ill-effects on the inshore industry. There is an enormous unfulfilled demand for fish throughout the country. That demand has grown of late as a result of improved standards of living since the war. Yet the demand cannot be supplied regularly. Equally, there is a growing export market arising from the same reason.

I see no reason why we should not co-ordinate the work of the larger trawlers with the existing inshore fleet so that both can prosper. My whole purpose is, in fact, to see that fishing of every kind prospers here. Long before the advent of any proposal for larger trawlers, a situation had developed in which one could see a decline in fishing by those fishermen who only fished part-time in the smaller harbours. Over the last 10 years there has been a decline in that kind of fishing.

In so far as the measure of the inshore fishing is concerned, I see no reason why it should be damaged by the advent of larger trawlers. I am not thinking in terms of large steam trawlers and there is no proposal at the moment for large ocean-going trawlers, penetrating right up to Newfoundland or Iceland. It is simply a question of extending the fleet by encouraging skippers to take grants and arrange for hire purchase of the kind of boats which can go further away from the coast and fish on the Porcupine Bank and the Grand Sole Bank, and go even further up for tunny fishing, thereby extending the area of fishing. Surely, that should be possible.

The nations of the world are catching fish all round our coast. There are roughly four major exporters of fish to Europe and the importing countries take 456,000 tons of fish per year. Within that ambit there should be opportunities for export from here.

Deputy Dillon asked about the work of the exploratory boat. We are the only nation without such a vessel. The object of the exploratory boat is not pure scientific research. It is rather the really practical work of ascertaining the movements of herring. We know the herring exist but they are not fished. One of the reasons why they are not fished is because the fishermen got out of the habit of fishing for herring. They are not prepared to take a very large commercial risk in going out to look for herring, with all the changes involved in gear and so forth.

The exploratory boats which operate for the Norwegian Government have had a practical significance. They have traced the herring shoals. They have traced the movements of cold and warm currents. They have followed the movements of the herring and they have been of practical assistance in developing an enormous industry in which, if I remember rightly, the catch of herring in one particular year off the Norwegian coast was 240,000 tons in a particular month. We may not ever achieve anything like that, but we can use this exploratory boat for doing work which it is impossible to ask fishermen to do because they cannot risk either their capital or their time in making what may be purely experimental journeys. Deputy Dillon may probably know that at one time herring were fished in Killala Bay. The matje herring was fished off the Donegal coast. That ceased, but we have no reason to believe that the herring are not still there. The same may be true also in the case of other fish species. I can assure the House the work of the boat will be purely to assist fishermen to fish more profitably and successfully.

Deputy Dillon also spoke of Bord na Móna and the effect of the turf effluent. Unfortunately we have observed that the mere provision of settling beds is not sufficient. The matter gets washed away very rapidly and the purpose of the investigation work is to see whether or not we need better types of settling beds, whether the material may have to be dredged or whether various types of coagulants may possibly have the satisfactory effect of eliminating the effluent. It will be a fairly complex business, but I can assure the Deputy and the House that Bord na Móna are showing very great co-operation in this matter and that they will work with the Department in a very sympathetic way to try to prevent the turf effluent from damaging new rivers where effects have already been seen.

Deputy Dillon also asked a question with regard to the training course. The course is not sufficiently advanced for fishermen to qualify for skipper's certificates. They, therefore, receive certificates as second hands. So far as we are concerned, the training they receive is so much more extensive than that which was available before, that they should be able to take over 56-foot boats and act as skippers, even though their certificates qualify them as second hands. That was the position in the case of trainees under the Gaeltacht scheme mooted by this Government before Deputy Dillon took office but which was carried out by him.

Several Deputies spoke about arterial drainage. In particular, Deputy Blowick talked about the Moy fishery. The position there is that under the Arterial Drainage Act the Board of Works consult the Fishery Section of the Department of Lands on the effect of arterial drainage upon any particular fishery. It is impossible for me to make any definite statement about the position of the Moy because the final consultations have not taken place. As most Deputies know, the amount of damage caused by arterial drainage depends on the natural conditions in the river, the extent of the drainage, very considerably on the method of drainage and the extent to which the drainage authority carry out their work in such a way as to permit spawning to continue at the correct season during the rotational work done on each tributary.

The damage can be put right to some extent—to a considerable extent, in many cases, by restocking and because of the fact that the spawning beds seem to come back on a natural basis by the establishment of an artificial spawning gravel, by the establishment of new beds of gravel, and by other means. It is true that a number of the rivers that have been drained have since had very satisfactory runs of fish. I am unable to say any more about the Moy fishery except to point out that the agricultural production which can be brought about by that drainage scheme is of very great importance to the community. At the same time, the fishery itself is of very great value to the country and there will have to be a reconciliation as far as possible between the two interests in order that the greatest amount of good can be done.

Deputy Esmonde made some observations on harbour development. Really major steps have been taken to provide a number of satisfactory harbours and the Deputy can take it for granted that one will be constituted in the south east coast in relation to the herring fishery there. There is now a much larger staff in the Board of Works and they are catching up on the tremendous arrears of harbour investigation which had accrued; they have been aided, in turn, by a consultant who has been able to present an overall picture of harbour needs so that, with more officials in the Board of Works working on it, we will get a considerable extension in harbour development work.

I become very impatient at the time it takes to do public works of any description but I know that, in the case of harbours, it is quite evident that when they were first constructed they were not constructed with sufficient care. Many of them were designed by able men, but they simply did not go far enough into the complications, into the movements of the sea and sand. Therefore they did not design harbours which would protect the boats when the wind was in a certain direction. It may sound fantastic — I hate to think about it because it will cause delay—but we have to get an actual model of the harbour built, with artificial water lapping against it, before we can make any decision. That is now the recognised practice and the most hardheaded engineers have to accept it in works of this kind. It invariably prolongs the final decision on the design, and the final work being carried out. As I say, there are more good men on the job than ever before and I hope they will produce results.

Deputy Dillon spoke on the question of oysters. I find that he was right in that some time ago experiments were carried out by the late Mr. Farran at a number of places including Killary but the results were inconclusive and it was left to the local people to develop the beds. There is a long term experiment at Clew Bay which is designed to ascertain the most favourable conditions for oyster growing, namely, the temperature, the heat and the nature of the sea bed and whether profitable conservation could be undertaken.

As some members of the House may know 100 years ago oysters were the food of the poor. In Great Britain some 500 million were sold but the number is now reduced to 8,000,000 by over-fishing and by the great virus plague which swept their coast and our coast also. The experiments carried out in Clew Bay and in Great Britain have not had very pleasing results. Under conditions which obtained before the oysters were supposed to breed with facility and with great propensity. I hope to examine the question as to whether we could not in addition to carrying out these breeding experiments fatten the oysters deliberately by putting down the beds not specifically for breeding. We may undertake that at a later date.

Deputy Esmonde made several references to the necessity for the protection of the Dunmore East fishery. I have every sympathy with what the Deputy said but the whole question of the extent to which we collaborate with another country bilaterally in regard to conservation and territorial limits and the whole question of establishing territorial limits is a matter for the Minister for External Affairs. If Deputies drew a straight base line around the coast of the country which is notional they may make mistakes when it comes to what the practice should be in relation to the laws established. They will see there should be some considerable improvement already, and I hope that there will be satisfactory results from the conference in 1960, but I do want to make it clear that we do not intend to do anything unilaterally, under our circumstances.

Some Deputies referred to the very small number of persons coming forward for training. The training scheme has been going only a short time, the full scheme of training, and I hope that it will be more popular later on. Of course, a career in fishing involves not only personal courage, but a particular liking for the sea, for the adventurous and hazardous life of the sea and, though a good income can be got in the case of a first class skipper with a good crew, it is not the sort of life which appeals to everybody. However, I believe there should be a sufficient number of people around our coasts who would like to go into fishing and I hope this course will attract more as time goes by. I also hope the new course for apprentices, for fishing hands, will result in young men coming forward who have not experience of the sea.

I think I have dealt with all the points that were raised. Any other observations made by Deputies, I shall have considered as sympathetically as possible.

Vote put and agreed to.

Progress reported; Committee to sit again.

The Dáil adjourned at 4.35 p.m. until 3 p.m. on Tuesday, 9th June, 1959.