JOINT COMMITTEE ON EUROPEAN AFFAIRS díospóireacht -
Thursday, 18 Dec 2008

Eel Management Plan: Discussion (Resumed).

Deputy Joanna Tuffy

Will responsibility for inland fisheries remain with the Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources in the long term? At present, responsibility for marine and fisheries issues is split between approximately six Departments. Moreover, the position appears to be extremely fluid, in that individual responsibilities appear to be moving between Departments within a matter of one or two years. I understand there is still some movement of responsibilities in this regard from the Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources. What is the position on this aspect of the brief? Why did the Department not simply decide to opt for the default position? My understanding is that if we did not do anything about it, a mandatory reduction of 50% as an immediate emergency measure would apply. Surely this would have been preferable. Why did we not simply opt for this for the time being and ascertain thereafter whether the entire subject could be examined in greater depth? Has an analysis been undertaken on this issue?

I note Mr. Sheridan's concluding remarks that every effort will be directed at identifying opportunities for commercial eel fishermen. Has there been an analysis of what this will mean in term of job losses? In Mr. Sheridan's view, what are the implications? Did he state there definitely would be no compensation or hardship scheme or is this being considered?

Mr. Sheridan has stated an evaluation will be made every three years until 2018 and every six years thereafter. Will it be possible to review the plan at any time to change it? Will we be committed to it for so many years or will we be able to modify it next year?

Chairman

I have caught eel. It is a fair achievement for anyone involved in politics to be able to catch an eel. I also have eaten eel which is a great delicacy, for want of a better description. I am familiar with the position in County Westmeath, as the previous joint committee received submissions from interests in the area. The points made by members are important because there is a tendency to agree, as a means of conservation, measures that appear to have the opposite effect. In some cases, this has not been caused by local angling or fishing interests.

Mr. Frank Sheridan

I should clarify that we have not specified an 90-year ban on the eel fishery. The plan indicates that if all the recommended measures are taken, that is, maximising the escapement of eel and reducing the human impact, the prospects are that stocks will recover to the target figures required by the regulation in 90 years' time. There will be slow progress towards recovery which is largely to do with the lifecycle of the eel. Eels mature in a period of 18 to 20 years on the island of Ireland and it will take four eel generations to try to recover the stocks to the sustainable level specified in the regulation.

The plan sets out a number of management options to be reviewed as required under the regulation. They will be reviewed by both the Irish authorities and the Europeand Union every three years up to 2018. If the information changes and we learn more about the status of stocks during that period, it will allow us to make adjustments to the plan. However, given the concerted reduction in recruitment, that is, juvenile eel coming to Irish waters, the stock has been in severe decline in the past 20 years.

Chairman

Why is that? This point has been raised by a couple of members.

Mr. Frank Sheridan

It is involves a combination of many factors. The number of eels escaping from the European landmass is reducing, which is due to the existence of a fishery, blockages to fish passage on land, environmental impacts, water quality and the effect of development on the habitat of these long-living creatures. As a result, fewer fish are escaping to the ocean to get back to the Sargasso Sea and some that do are suffering from diseases that may affect their ability to return to the spawning grounds in the Sargasso Sea.

Chairman

I apologise for interrupting Mr. Sheridan, but this is fundamental to the points raised. For instance, what studies have been undertaken of the causes of the diseases and the slowdown in the release back into the seas? What scientific evidence is available to show what the causes might be? To what extent are eel anglers in Ireland contributing to this, if at all?

Mr. Frank Sheridan

There have been many investigations undertaken throughout Europe because this species is common to most member states. It is as a result of the work done by the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea that the poor status of the stock has been identified. The causes which are various relate to the effect on the habitat of eel inland and its survival at sea. Environmental factors are at stake in both cases. Efforts are made throughout the member states to reduce the impact of man through the improvement of water quality. The water framework directive provides for the improvement of water quality throughout the European Union which will have a beneficial effect on eel as well as other fish species.

The main issue of concern is that the eel is slow growing and spawns once in its lifetime and that it will take a number of generations to recover stocks. That is why the timeframe is so long — a period of 90 years has been allowed for it to reach recovery. The closure of the fishery and the other measures proposed will be reviewed every three years and adjustments made, depending on the impact they have on stocks. In response to Deputy Timmins, the closure of the fishery will be achieved by way of by-laws made under the fisheries Acts by the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources. The by-laws will have effect throughout the fishery districts and be reviewed as required, depending on the success or otherwise of the measures taken.

Deputy Costello inquired about the number of fishermen involved in the fishery. While 295 licences were issued last year, they were taken up by approximately 100 to 150 fishermen, but not all are fished. It is a part-time occupation, given the nature and size of the fishery. I doubt that any of these fishermen rely on eel fishing as their only source of income. Nevertheless, it will be an important part of their annual income. Our efforts through Bord Iascaigh Mhara and the Central Fisheries Board will be aimed at identifying diversification opportunities for them under existing and possibly new schemes in order to replace their former activity for as long as the fishery remains closed.

Deputy Costello inquired also about the impact on the recreational fishery which, in fact, is not significant, as not many anglers target eel. More than likely they are caught as a by-catch in the effort to catch other fish. The purpose of the plan is to recover stocks; therefore, there will be a prohibition on the killing of eel in the recreational as the commercial fishery.

Deputy Costello asked about the status of the fishery on Lough Neagh. It has been managed by a co-operative for many years. In fact, it has been involved in a restocking process, whereby juvenile glass eels were imported from the River Severn and other jurisdictions in order to compensate for the lack of returning eels to the fishery. As a result, it has been able to maintain eel numbers in the catchment. I understand the fishery can demonstrate it is achieving the targets set down in the current regulation. It may be able to continue, as long as it can demonstrate compliance with the regulation.

Deputy Joe Costello

Are we not able to restock in a similar fashion?

Mr. Frank Sheridan

Restocking with a lifecycle as long as an eel's would only have a beneficial effect on the escapement of adult eels in 20 years' time. The plan provides for investigating the opportunities for restocking but the difficulty is that there are not enough juvenile eels in our waters for the purpose of restocking. Research will be undertaken in the first three years of the management plan to establish what, if any, surplus of glass eels there is in river bodies that would be suitable for restocking. In the meantime the restocking taking place will continue. It occurs chiefly at hydro-barriers where glass eels are captured at the foot of the dam and transported into the catchment. Based on recruitment in recent years, the indications are that there are not significant volumes of glass eel available for restocking purposes and this further contributes to the long duration required to reach recovery.

To answer the question about whether the fish choose the rivers in which they populate, in fact, juvenile eels travel from the Sargasso Sea as larvae in the plankton soup, as such. It is largely accidental where it reaches the shores of Europe, which is everywhere from north Africa to northern Norway by way of currents and tides. There are some areas of concentration. The Bay of Biscay is one such area where a considerable quantity of glass eels start life. The larvae are washed into the Mediterranean Sea and the Baltic Sea. Where they arrive is haphazard. Therefore, it is totally outside our control.

Deputy Tuffy inquired about the prospect of having to resign ourselves to the default position, as she described it, the sanction position specified in the regulation of the closure of 50% of the fishery. We know from the data gathered that it would not be sufficient to recover stocks. As a result, it would not be acceptable in the evaluation to be undertaken by the Commission as our contribution to the recovery of stocks. Additional difficulties are associated with retaining a portion of the fishery in this way, in that the regulation requires a member state that keeps a fishery open to introduce a traceability scheme. If it were 50% of the existing fishery, it would be uneconomical for a 50 tonne fishery. It would require a significant monitoring and enforcement effort that would be costly in a smaller fishery. It could also possibly compromise the trap and transport operation that will have to be put in place to enable the passage of eels around hydroelectric dams. For those reasons, it is not practical to retain a portion of the existing fishery.

Chairman

It must be remembered that the management plan has to be finalised by 31 December 2008.

Senator Terry Leyden

I support the motion.

Chairman

The motion is agreed.

Senator Terry Leyden

Mr. Sheridan has given much of the details of the proposals. Could he summarise it for the layman? My view is that it is a sell-out. This will put pressure on getting the Lisbon treaty passed.

Chairman

Is the Senator proposing another motion?

Senator Terry Leyden

I propose that we set down a motion to renegotiate this management plan. Has it been agreed to sell the Irish eel fisheries out? Is this discussion a case of shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted?

Deputy Billy Timmins

I spent many childhood summers catching eels and feeding them to ducks. Now, I am beginning to feel guilty about destroying part of our heritage. I have noticed there has been a drop in eel numbers. I have no difficulty in supporting Senator Leyden's proposal. However, can the committee make a proposal to have the management plan deferred or renegotiated or is it a fait accompli?

Chairman

The committee can make a submission to the Minister at any time and pass a motion to that end.

Deputy Billy Timmins

Rather than allowing this plan to be agreed by 31 December, the committee should invite representatives from the eel industry. We do not want to make a decision that could wipe out the livelihood and the tradition of this fishery with just hearing one side of the case. Mr. Sheridan has given the detailed scientific reasons the eel needs to be preserved. However, we need to hear the other side of the story.

Senator Terry Leyden

I agree. The motion could ask for a deferral of the decision to allow for submissions from the eel industry. Deputy O'Rourke informed me of an eel fisheries group from Athlone who asked to make a submission. Is it true the Ardnacrusha power station was responsible for the destruction of many eel stocks?

Deputy Timmy Dooley

No real consideration seems to have been given to restocking. The example of Lough Neagh suggests it is possible to do. The difficulty is not of an Irish making as I understand it. Europe wide, almost 70% of glass eels are exported to third countries, which has an impact on stocks. It is little like a chicken farmer who sells all his eggs and wonders why he has no chickens. If we continue this strategy, we will have few eel stocks. Why is the management plan not concentrating more on restocking? Mr. Sheridan claimed restocking would take 20 years but his proposal is to close the fisheries for 95 years. If a proper plan was put in place to target the restocking of the rivers, in conjunction with the industry, it might bring about a faster rejuvenation of stocks. Mr. Sheridan's proposal is to preserve the older stocks. I would have thought catching the glass eels and preserving the younger stock was the best way to preserve the stock rather than selling them as a delicacy.

Mr. Frank Sheridan

Irish eel stocks are in very poor condition and will continue to decline over the next 18 years.

Chairman

Up to 200 fishermen operate with 295 licences. According to my calculations, they probably have an annual income of €4,000. As it is not a rather large sum, is it the case that Irish fishermen have not contributed to the demolition of the stocks?

Mr. Frank Sheridan

This is the European stock levels. The impact of the activities of all member states has contributed to the demise of the stocks, including Ireland. It may be to different levels but we are as culpable as any other member state for the demise of the stocks to date.

Deputy Timmy Dooley

We do not export elvers.

Mr. Frank Sheridan

The Deputy is correct because there are not sufficient numbers of elvers for harvesting. The harvest of glass eels has been prohibited for many years, in recognition that this decline has been going on for the past 20 years. There is not sufficient stock for the purpose of restocking the system. Any restocking must be beneficial to the future escapement.

The Deputy made the point that our focus is on protecting our adult stock rather than the juvenile stock. The regulation's emphasis is to ensure that the adult stock escapes for the purposes of spawning to ensure a continued cycle and further juvenile eels returning to Europe's shores.

These stocks are in a perilous state. We must take significant action to protect them. That does not just apply to Ireland but to all member states. It is an EU regulation that must be observed by Ireland and all other member states. We do not have a choice in the matter. In the event that we do not deliver our management plan by 31 December 2008, or if the plan is found not to be adequate by the European Commission, it will apply immediate sanctions which could include closure of 50% of the fishery. Ireland will be obliged to take whatever other actions are required to facilitate a full recovery of the fishery in the shortest time possible.

The Ardnacrusha power plant, like all hydroelectric schemes, has had an impact on the passage of migratory fish. When the facility was built, there were elver passes installed. Various measures have been taken to enable the passage of adult eels through the dam. However, these have not been sufficient measures to date. As part of the eel management plan, the ESB will redouble its efforts to trap adult eel at Killaloe and transport them to the other side of the dam. They are working on other technological measures to divert escaping eel around the dam at Parteen. They are looking at engineering solutions that could be applied to the dam in order to improve escapement and recruitment. Similar actions will apply at other hydro stations as well, the Erne in particular, where there is the prospect of an improvement in escapement if similar types of measures are undertaken.

Chairman

I ask the members if they wish to propose a motion to defer further consideration until the committee has an opportunity to meet the interested bodies.

Senator Terry Leyden

I propose that further consideration of this matter be deferred until the committee has had an opportunity to meet the interested parties.

Chairman

I do not know whether it may be possible to defer the closing date of 31 December. I am not even certain whether that can be done.

Deputy Timmy Dooley

Has the committee any powers in this regard?

Mr. Frank Sheridan

I cannot answer that question.

Senator Terry Leyden

We are asking the Minister to defer his decision until we have met the other stakeholders.

Chairman

What does the committee want to do?

Senator Terry Leyden

I have made a proposal to that effect.

Chairman

Is that agreed? Agreed.

We shall find out in due course what effect it will have. I thank Mr. Sheridan for addressing the committee and for his detailed submission. No doubt we will be touch with him again as regards the concerns expressed by members.

I propose we go into private session for the remainder of the meeting. Is that agreed? Agreed.

The joint committee went into private session at 1.05 p.m. and adjourned at 1.10 p.m. until Thursday, 15 January 2009.