Irish Driftnet Campaign



The 1st of November 2006 is a GREAT day for the salmon rivers of Europe


Driftnet Closure Announced by The Irish Minster of the Marine


Statement from the Irish Government announcing the closure of the driftnets

Daily Telegraph Article

Irish Government Committee calls for closure of driftnet fishery 23rd October 2006

Irish Government Committee Report

STATEMENT BY STOP NOW

Tuesday 4th July 2006

EU ISSUES IRELAND FINAL WARNING OVER SALMON DRIFT NETS

The EU Commission has issued a final written warning to Ireland in relation to the drift net fishing of wild salmon off our coast. The warning was issued yesterday (3rd July) and requested that, from 2007 on, Irish policy on wild salmon fishery full complies with the EU Habitats Directive.

The Stop Now campaign welcomed the development.

According to Stop Now Chairman, Niall Greene, ‘Under the EU Habitats Directive, exploitation of wild salmon is permissible if a scientific assessment confirms that the practice will not produce negative effects on salmon stocks. Earlier this year comprehensive scientific evidence presented to the National Salmon Commission demonstrated beyond a shadow of doubt that drift net fishing causes enormous damage to our salmon stocks.

‘The EU Commission’s statement further emphasises the need to ensure that 2006 is the last year of drift netting for salmon in Ireland. On 24th March last the Government committed to adhering to the scientific advice when deciding policy in 2007. That commitment has been reinforced by yesterday’s final warning from the EU Commission.

‘The Independent Salmon Group, established by the Government, is currently examining measures to address any financial loss suffered by the commercial drift net sector in bringing policy in line with scientific advice in 2007. The angling sector is willing to make a contribution to a fair compensation scheme devised by the Independent Salmon Group. For us, the key issue is that the long-term devastation of wild salmon caused by drift netting ends in 2006 and all stakeholders commit to a long-term strategy to restore salmon stocks in Irish rivers.’

Niall Greene acknowledged the role that the Wessex Salmon and Rivers Trust played in bringing this issue to the attention of the EU Commission. ‘Brian Marshall, Chairman of the Wessex Salmon and Rivers Trust, together with his colleagues, deserve our thanks for their tenacity on this issue. In 2002 and 2004 the Trust lodged formal complaints with the EU Environment Commission against Ireland’s policy of licencing drift nets. Many groups subsequently lodged similar complaints and the action taken by the EU Commission yesterday is in no small way a result of the initiative demonstrated by the Wessex Salmon and Rivers Trust and other angling organisations throughout Britain and Ireland.’

Ends.



WSRT Press Release 04/07/06

WESSEX SALMON AND RIVERS TRUST

Registered Charity No: 1051068 www.wsrt.org.uk

EU RED CARD FOR IRISH SALMON NETS

BRUSSELS ISSUES A FINAL WARNING TO THE IRISH GOVERNMENT

European Commission act on Wessex Salmon’s complaint.

The Irish Government, which allows the exploitation of protected UK salmon stocks by their west coast salmon drift net fishery, is infringing the European Habitats Directive. Wessex Salmon and Rivers Trust (WSRT) complained to the EU Environment Commission. This complaint was upheld and a warning was issued, by the EU to Ireland, in July 2005. Ireland responded with promises of full compliance with the Directive. These promises were broken when Marine Minister John Browne TD, in March of this year, licensed the killing of over 90,000 fish by this indiscriminate netting

The salmon drift net industry, both licensed and illegal, that operates along Ireland’s western and southern coasts is indiscriminate. It kills not only Irish salmon, but protected fish from rivers in the South and West of England, Wales, France Spain and Germany. These rivers are designated as Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) by the European Habitats Directive. Salmon are the primary reason for that highest level of EU protection. The Environment Agency reports that of the 14 English and Welsh SAC rivers only one has enough salmon spawning. The rivers Avon, Itchen and Test are the worst affected. The Irish nets are the only exploitation of salmon from those rivers.
Wessex Salmon also support the long term campaigning by Irish, English and International NGO’s to close the Fishery.
In 2002, and again in 2004, Wessex Salmon and Rivers Trust, lodged formal complaints, with the EU Environment Commission, against the Irish Government as the licensing authority for the nets. It cites four infringements of the Directive, The Wye and Usk foundation lodged a similar complaint. Most importantly in 2004, eight Irish salmon river interests and, in the UK, The South West Rivers Association also lodged parallel complaints
After examination by all of the twenty-five EU Commissioners the WSRT complaint was upheld and, in July 2005, a first warning of proceedings was issued to the Irish Government.
The Irish Government has responded to the EU warning, promising compliance but have reneged on that promise.

Brian Marshall, Chairman of Wessex Salmon, said.

"There is strong joint English and Irish scientific evidence that proves these nets have a serious impact upon the recovery of our threatened salmon stocks. We have not killed a single salmon on our river for over ten years. Why should Ireland kill thousands. Clearly the ending of netting, which must now be inevitable, will make a significant addition to our returning spawning stocks."



Letter from Mr Brian Marshall, Chairman of the WSRT to Mr Joey Murrin, Chairman of the National Salmon Commission

31st January 2006

Mr Joey Murrin
Chairman
National Salmon Commission
Dublin

Dear Joey,

I have read with great interest the report and advice of your Standing Scientific Committee (SSC), in particular the ‘Precautionary Catch Advice' for 2006. As you and your members know, the quality of that advice and the conclusions of your committee are as critical to the welfare of our threatened salmon stocks as they are to Ireland's.

It is for this reason that the European Commission has warned your Government of proceedings for infringements of the European Habitats Directive. We note that the following undertakings have been given to the EU. by your Government in it’s response to that warning.

In the context of these unequivocal undertakings I wish to make some observations on the SSC report that I hope you and your Commission might find helpful.

The report clearly points out that: "In the provision of advice the National Salmon Commission (NSC) must also consider Ireland’s international obligations". Going on to include the EU Habitats Directive in those obligations.

Contrary to the recent, somewhat mystifying, statement issued by your Marine Ministry, the report categorically states, with supporting evidence, that Irish mixed stock drift nets are taking a significant proportion of salmon that would otherwise return to the rivers of other EU nations. This, of course, includes UK Special Area of Conservation (SAC) rivers, where salmon are the ‘Primary Reason’ for that designation, that are failing to meet their conservation limits for salmon. Thus Ireland is preventing the UK from achieving compliance with an EU Objective.

The report also states;

"Given the low level of stock generally, it is not currently possible to manage existing mixed stock fisheries (i.e. drift nets and some draft nets) such that only those stocks meeting their Conservation Limits will be caught and that only the number of fish in excess of the Conservation Limits for these stocks will be harvested".

In this context, added to our dismay that the SSC should advise the continuation of any mixed stock drift netting, we note that their T A C proposals based on the ‘Precautionary Catch of Wild Salmon’ aspires only to achieve a 75% probability of meeting Irish Conservation Limits. Such an aspiration, to achieve only 75% of a conservation limit, is to aspire to failure. Please also remember that conservation limits are only a minimum acceptable level of stocks.

In the light of all the undertakings and facts referred to above, it is unacceptable that such recommendations are promoted, with total disregard to Ireland’s international obligations already referred to.

It is blatantly apparent from every sensible point of view, and a truism accepted by every salmon nation in the world, except Ireland, that mixed stock salmon drift net fishing cannot be allowed to continue.

To continue to pretend that this destructive practice is justifiable on scientific, environmental, commercial, economic, social, legal or moral grounds is indefensible.

You and your Commission have a unique opportunity to take a momentous step forward in European salmon conservation by advising the minister, in the strongest possible terms, to close the drift net fishery forthwith. To do otherwise can only earn you national and international opprobrium.

Yours sincerely,

Wessex Salmon and Rivers Trust

Brian Marshall Chairman

PRESS RELEASE

27th December 2005

IRISH MINISTER ORDERS STRICT COMPLIANCE WITH E U SALMON RULES

Irish Marine Ministry tells E U Commission; "Minister Gallagher fully accepts that more needs to be done to ensure the conservation of the wild salmon".

The mixed stock salmon drift net industry, both licensed and illegal, that operates along Ireland’s western and southern coasts catches not only Irish salmon, but protected fish from rivers in England, Wales, France Spain and Germany. These rivers are designated as Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) by the European Habitats Directive with salmon as the primary reason for that highest level of EU protection. The rivers of Southern and South West England are the worst affected.

The Environment Agency reports that of the 14 English and Welsh SAC rivers only one has enough salmon spawning. In all of these rivers local interests have adopted extreme measures of conservation and protection to conserve their remaining stocks.
Long term efforts by both Irish, English and international N G O’s to persuade the Irish Government to close the fishery in the interests of their own economy and European conservation have failed.
In 2002 Wessex Salmon and Rivers Trust, (WSRT) whose main focus is the most seriously affected River Hampshire Avon, lodged a formal complaint with the EU Environment Commission, against the Irish Government as the licensing authority for the nets. It cites four infringements of the Directive,
In 2004 eight Irish salmon river interests lodged similar complaints.

After examination by all of the twenty-five EU Commissioners the WSRT complaint was upheld and, in July 2005, a first warning of proceedings was issued to the Irish Government.

The Irish Government have responded to the EU warning.

Brian Marshall, Chairman of Wessex Salmon said.

"There is strong joint English and Irish scientific evidence that proves these nets have a serious impact upon the recovery of our SAC salmon populations. Clearly their closure will make a significant addition to our returning spawning stocks. Whilst we welcome the apparent change of attitude from the Minister, we wait to see tangible evidence that Ireland at last recognises it’s international obligations".

Editor’s notes:
A copy of the original complaint and other background material can be seen below.

Dail Questions 16th November 2005

Fisheries Protection.

91. Mr. Gormley asked the Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources if his Department has received formal notice from the European Commission regarding the effects of drift netting on the conservation status of salmon; if such a letter is the first step in an infringement procedure against Ireland in respect of its failure to meet its obligations in respect of salmon, which enjoy a special status in certain designated special areas of conservation under the habitats directive; if he has responded to the Commission regarding same; and the nature of that response.

Mr. Gallagher: The Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government has primary responsibility for the implementation in Ireland of Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and wild flora and fauna. That Department received a letter of formal notice from the European Commission dated 5 July 2005 regarding a complaint made to the Commission that Ireland is not managing drift net fishing for salmon in accordance with the directive. As the complaint concerns drift net fishing in Irish waters, the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources has worked closely with the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government on drafting a reply to the European Commission’s letter. This response has now been forwarded to the Commission. As the correspondence between the European Commission and the Irish authorities may be considered an initial step in possible infringement procedures against Ireland on this issue, I am advised that the matter remains sub judice and therefore I cannot comment on the exact details of our response at this time.

The Deputy will be aware that as Minister of State with responsibility for the marine, I rely on the advice of the National Salmon Commission, which is a statutory advisory body, in determining conservation and management measures for the wild Irish salmon fishery. The statutory terms of reference, which I have recently provided to the salmon commission, require, inter alia, that any practical recommendations made to me having regard to the conservation, management, protection and development of the national salmon resource must be considered in the context of national obligations under relevant legislation of the European Union. I am satisfied that these terms of reference will ensure that the advice provided to me by the National Salmon Commission for the 2006 salmon fishing season and beyond will take account of the requirements of Council Directive 92/43/EEC, otherwise known as the habitats directive, in so far as they apply to the wild salmon species.

Mr. Eamon Ryan: I am slightly amazed that the Minister of State cannot tell me anything about the nature of the communication between his Department and the European Commission. During several referendum campaigns and during the Nice treaty referendum campaign in particular, I remember there was a commitment and an assurance that the European Union was opening up and that it was possible for national parliaments to be involved in some way in the process of interaction between the State and the Commission. The Minister of State has said he can tell me nothing about the nature of the correspondence and the nature of his response. This is a terrible indictment of the system, whether the problem stems from the Commission or from Ireland. It is not appropriate for this Parliament to be kept blind and ignorant of any such correspondence and developments. This goes against the principles of openness and transparency and good government both here and in the European Commission.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: The Deputy must ask a question.

Mr. Eamon Ryan: Who raised with the Commission the original concern regarding Ireland’s possible breach of the habitats directive? Is the House to know nothing about these proceedings? Is the letter from the Commission the first step in a formal case being taken against Ireland regarding infringement of procedure or does this come later? If the Minister of State is unable to inform the House now, when at any stage will this Parliament have a role or possibility of discovering the circumstances of this issue? How do I, as an elected representative with an interest in this issue, find out information if I am unable to do so by asking questions in my national Parliament?

Mr. Gallagher: I will certainly not hide behind any directive but I am advised, because this is an initial step in possible infringement proceedings against us, that the matter remains sub judice and that I cannot therefore comment on the exact details of the response at this time. It may well be that the European Commission is prepared to give that information but, from my experience of it, I doubt that very much because it could prejudice any case that may be taken. In 2003, the EU Commission, that is, the Directorate General Environment which deals with the Habitats Directive, first notified the Irish authorities of complaints received from a UK source which contend that Ireland’s approval level of drift-net fishing for Atlantic salmon represented excessive exploitation which was affecting the number of salmon returning to the rivers.

The Commission has received a complaint but it will not take a decision until it has all of the information. The Commission asked the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government to respond. We have worked closely on this. One of the officials in the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources was in Brussels recently and that official, in conjunction with the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government’s section dealing with the Habitats Directive, responded. In both our response and in our discussions with the Commission to date, we clearly outlined the management regime in place and how our policies and strategies are in keeping with our obligations under all of the relevant EU legislation. I will not waste the time of the House because Deputy Ryan knows well the steps that have been taken and it is not necessary to elaborate on this. If there is any further information I can give the Deputy or the House without affecting the sub judice aspect of this, I will be glad to provide it.

Mr. Eamon Ryan: Can the Minister of State confirm that it was the UK Government that made the original complaint in 2003? Given that the complaint is two years old, if the Commission decides that there is a case to answer, whatever about the Minister of State’s reassurance in that regard, and that it may be decided to be in breach of the Habitats Directive, how quickly could the Commission enforce an end to the current practice? Could this put an end to the current practice before next season is out or what is the typical time frame before a decision is implemented? Given that we have already responded with information from our side, could the Commission make an immediate decision and direct Ireland to change its practices accordingly?

Mr. Perry: On the infringement case, I am somewhat disappointed. I agree with Deputy Ryan. In light of the possible infringement of the Habitats Directive, why is this information not in the public domain? In light of the fact that the Minister of State ignored scientific recommendations on the number of salmon that could be caught and the number of licensees, is he adding to the infringement possibilities? Can he indicate how many salmon were caught in commercial nets this year?

Mr. Broughan: Having read the instrument on the National Salmon Commission, is it the case that the new report contains a compensatory mechanism? Did I read it correctly? Could there be a compensatory mechanism, possibly mentioned here on budget day or whenever?

Mr. Gallagher: First, I do not know who it was, whether it was the UK Government, an individual, a group or a company.

Mr. Eamon Ryan: Could the Minister of State make that information available?

Mr. Gallagher: If it is available. I will have to clear that with the Commission. I am sure Deputy Ryan, above all, would not want me to do anything which might prejudice the outcome.

We responded to that complaint in November 2003. We provided the detailed information on the management regime and no response was received from the Commission until July last. They have requested further information and now we have responded to that as expeditiously as possible.

In answer to Deputy Perry, this year I accepted the advice of the National Salmon Commission, as did all my predecessors since the establishment of that commission. I do not have the information on the number of fish. It is important to note that 94% of those catching salmon by way of drift, draft, snap or loop are compliant.

I do not know if these are Deputy Perry’s views. Deputy McGinley referred to Deputy Perry, but I know Deputy Perry does not represent the views of my constituency colleague, Deputy McGinley when he suggests that we should lower the tack.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: That concludes the questions for today.

E U COMMISSION ACT AGAINST IRISH SALMON DRIFT NETS

6th July 2005

We can now announce that the EU Commission for the Environment have upheld the complaint placed by the WSRT against the Irish Government licensed Driftnet Fishery and are opening proceedings.

For many years the licensed Irish Salmon driftnets have captured hundreds of thousands of migrating salmon off their west coast. Many of these originate from endangered populations in protected rivers of England, Wales and Southern Europe. These rivers enjoy the highest level of protection under the European Habitats Directive and are designated Special Areas of Conservation (SAC)

Because the Irish Government have consistently refused to obey the EU rules Wessex Salmon and Rivers Trust in 2002 lodged a formal complaint with the EU Environment Commission citing four infringements of the Habitats Directive. This complaint was immediately supported by replicas from The Wye and Usk Foundation, Eden Rivers Trust and later the South West Rivers Association. Most important support was added last year by the submission of eight complaints from Irish interests.

The Commission will now issue a written warning to the Irish Government that continued infringement may lead to prosecution in the European Court.

Original EU Complaint

Contravention of the European Habitats Directive

Exploitation of the salmon (salmo salar) stocks of failing UK SAC. rivers by the Republic of Ireland drift net fishery.

We submit that the Irish government, being the licensing and enforcing authority for the named fishery are in contravention of the principles, the spirit and the letter of the provisions of The European Habitats Directive in the following respects.

By:

WSRT Chairman with NASF in Brussels.

EU Parliamentary Fisheries Committee - Brussels 15th / 16th June 2005 Presentation by Brian Marshall: Chairman of Wessex Salmon and Rivers Trust.

The NASF and WSRT presentations were made despite strong protests from the Irish member Mr Sean O’Neachtain that the delegation and their speeches should not be permitted. The Chairman overruled him but firmly cautioned that whilst they would listen to what proposal for remedies could be offered and what has already been dine, he would not allow attacks upon the member countries or their representatives

Good morning and thank you for this opportunity to address your committee.

Wessex Salmon and Rivers Trust is a small conservation trust in southern England whose objectives include the protection, conservation and restoration of English lowland southern rivers, in particular their threatened salmon populations. In this work we enjoy working partnerships with UK Defra Government Agencies; The Environment Agency and English Nature and with the NASF International Coalition.

The rivers of Southern & South West England and Wales, where the salmon populations have suffered such serious decline that they have reached threatened or even endangered levels are the focus of my address this morning..

Fourteen of these rivers, as a result of the low level of their stocks, are declared Candidate Special Areas of Conservation under the terms of the European Habitats directive, with salmon as a primary or a qualifying reason for that designation. With one exception. ALL THOSE RIVERS ARE FAILING TO MEET THEIR MINMUM CONSERVATION LIMIT, SOME BY AS MUCH AS 70%.

If I may briefly describe the circumstances of one such cSAC river and what local restoration measures AND RESTRICTIONS are in place. The River Hampshire Avon.

This river was once able to support thriving angling tourism, local, rural employment in hotels, restaurants, shops and fisheries. It also has small heritage, commercial netting operation, itself a tourist attraction. A socially and economically important rural asset.

The once thousands of salmon that ran the river are reduced now to a mere few hundred. No salmon has been killed for commercial or sport reasons on that river for over ten years. Net and rod seasons and methods are curtailed. Major habitat and restoration initiatives, in hand throughout the whole period, continue.

Thus the whole catchment, and in particular it’s salmon, have earned the protection available from the Habitats Directive. The fish are entirely protected by domestic provisions in the rivers, and in UK home waters. Also by virtue of the most important agreements negotiated by NASF, they are protected in their in their north Atlantic feeding grounds.

Unfortunately the excellent and comprehensive rules protecting these salmon "throughout their whole lifecycle" by the European Habitats Directive are being deliberately contravened by the continuing operation of the licensed Irish mixed stock drift net fishery.

This fishery intercepts salmon originating and nurtured in other nations as they migrate from the North Atlantic feeding grounds to their natal rivers. These include cSAC rivers in England, Wales, France, Germany and Spain as well, of course, Ireland itself.

Joint English / Irish government research, published this year, confirms that the Irish drift net fishery remains a major exploiter of salmon stocks in England and Wales. I quote from a statement, issued by the UK Government’s authority; The Environment Agency:

In Wales and the south and west of England, only 4 of the 45 salmon rivers currently have enough salmon spawning.

Only 1 of the 14 rivers designated as Special Areas of Conservation for salmon under the EU Habitats Directive, within these regions, currently has enough salmon spawning.

For many rivers, total exploitation needs to be reduced to a low level to help stocks recover. ICES advice is that action to reduce exploitation in mixed stock fisheries is important.

The Irish drift net fishery is a major, or even the main, source of exploitation.

Obviously in the failing SAC Rivers Avon, and Itchen, for example, where NO domestic exploitation at all takes place, the Irish are the only exploiters of those threatened fish. The same research highlights that the current level of that exploitation is 12% of all returning fish, It has been as high as 28%. To that must be added illegal and unreported fishing, and a high percentage of the catch ruined by seals. The Habitats Directive protection is not a permissive measure. It prohibits exploitation of these fish by Ireland.

Not withstanding years of international and domestic efforts, including those from your speakers today, the Irish Government has refused to discontinue their killing of their EU neighbours threatened salmon.

WSRT Chairman at the French Embassy in Dublin

I think the best way to report the Embassy visit is to provide a link to the International Herald Tribune report of the gathering.

International Herald Tribune17/6/2005

The Chairman and Orri visit the Rhine to enlist support Feb 2005

Notes of visit to Rhine Commissioners, Koblenz, 23rd and 24th February 2005

The mighty Rhine

A working example of European conservation co operation.

Delegation comprised:

Orri Vigfusson. Chairman NASF International.

Peter Olbrich. NASF Germany and President Lachs-und Meerforellen Sozietat e.V. Hamburg

Brian Marshall WSRT & NASF International Coalition.

Our shared objectives were to Introduce NASF International to the Rhine Commissioners, Outline achievements. Offer assistance and seek support for Northern European efforts. Introduce and promote WSRT. Demonstrate Southern UK salmon situation and current domestic efforts, promote EU complaint and seek Commissions support .

The Commission comprises representatives from Germany, France, Holland and Switzeralnd.

We receive a warm welcome to the afternoon meeting of the Commissioners and the secretariat and time was set aside for our presentations. Orri had prepared a comprehensive OHP delivery of the history and current activities of NASF. We are familiar with Orri’s presentation. He was his usual impressive advocate describing achievements so far. He emphasised the importance to Germany of the vital moratoria on the feeding grounds, aspirations for Ireland, Norway and the Baltic, He briefly touched on Irish matters, reminding the meeting of the damage this last remaining major mixed stock fishery is doing and that they were taking German fish as well. He emphasised the international character of salmon and how important international co-operation in the protection and restoration is.

The restoration of Rhine salmon is from a base of extinction since the 1950’s and the Commission are carrying out major infrastructure, habitat and reintroduction initiatives throughout the international length of this massive catchment.

Brian reports: Using our familiar histogram, to exemplify lowland English salmon status, I illustrated how similar, but in miniature, our joint situations are. I explained what we are doing domestically, emphasising the current zero exploitation. I gave detailed information on the Irish drift net operation, retailing our perception of the impact of those nets upon our stocks, southern Europe’s and perhaps the Rhine’s. In fact Rhine salmon use the North sea route as well.
I spent some time detailing the EU complaint procedure and status. My impression is that this activity was not known to the gathering I reminded them that they too were all representing EU members and could act as we had but I asked that they would, at least, institute activities in support of our complaint.

Peter Olbrich also spoke to the meeting at some length, outlining what was happening in North Germany and endorsing the work of NASF.

Train and plane times dictated closure of the meeting but we three were asked to meet a large group of the delegates to continue discussions in the evening which we did. I learned that the Rhine has introduced 13 million juvenile salmon in the last three years. This is not well known internationally Individual discussions included, on my part, distribution of copies of our complaint and my ‘interpretation’ of Ireland’s conservation measures.

The following morning we met with the Commission’s President and Federal Ministry Representative; Dr. Fritz Holzwarth. We repeated much of what has been reported above. He was very interested in the German and Irish Government meeting planned for later this year, and hopes to join that meeting He was made most welcome. I too hope to attend that meeting.. He was also keenly interested in our complaint. He expressed the belief that the EHD applied only to salmon in fresh water and I was able to reassure him on this point, explaining that this point has been carefully examined by the EU Commissionl, and the vigorous, high level activities currently taking place.

In my view, and that of Orri and Peter, all objectives and more were achieved.

Brian Marshall.

Please click on link below.

Western Mail Wales 18/1/2005

National Geographic 10/1/2005

Sunday Times 9/1/2005

Hampshire Avon Migratory Salmonid Catch

Hants Avon Migratory Salmonid Catch

R F E R A C: 28th January 2005 Item 17 Wildlife, Recreation and Marine Feedback

Annex 1

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON THE IRISH DRIFT NET FISHERY

A PERSONAL view from Brian Marshall, who declares a non pecuniary interest as Chairman of Wessex Salmon and Rivers Trust. WSRT are Associate members of The South West Rivers Association.

I believe the cosy acceptance by so many of everything Irish officialdom says, whilst they increase their destruction of Europe's migrating salmon, has gone on for far too long. I would make the following comments upon the repeatedly published 'Conservation Measures' retailed in the above paper.

- Drift nets licences capped at 887 (880 issued in 2002),

Scientific advice was for a cap of 770 nets. Drift nets are up to 1.2 km in length. It remains a massive fishery. By far the largest in the northern hemisphere.

- Area of sea reduced from 12 to 6 nautical miles;

At no cost to productivity. Southern European stocks migrate through this area. Very many fish travel within a mile of the coast.

- Drift net season cut to 2 months. June and July

Widespread illegal fishing takes place outside these times and there is documented evidence of regional fishery officials arbitrarily extending the season to allow quotas to be filled. In December 2004 trusted eye witnesses reported salmon drift netting taking place in the Cork area with abundant salmon available from car boots in the harbour during the run up to Christmas.

- Drift netting restricted to 4 days a week (0400 to 2100 only),

Many nets are set overnight to be recovered during legal fishing times. Many fish that become enmeshed during this unmanned evasion of the rules, as well as during legal fishing, are ruined by seals before the salmon are recovered. Such firh are not reported.

- Monofilament netting legalised (has freed up enforcement effort for better control of the fishery.)

For the Irish authorities describe this as a conservation measure is disingenuous. It has resulted in a very significant increase in the adoption of the more lethal monofilament and in catches. At the same time the governments allowed an increase in the depth of these nets. This increase, from 30 mesh to 45 mesh represents an increase of 50% in capture area.

- Mandatory carcass tagging and log book scheme in 2001

There is currently a major fraud investigation by the Gardai into this and other areas of the Irish commercial fishery. There is also eyewitness testimony to numerous additional Orange tags being liberally distributed by officials, in addition to those for the legal quotas. Only a limited number of the main markets are checked for quota and /or micro tags. Many tagged fish are deliberately sold 'off market' and there is evidence that illegal sales have increased.

- Total allowable catch (TAC) of 219,619 salmon for all commercial fisheries in 2002, 7 % reduction,

On the 12th May 2003 Minister of State Browne, in answer to a parliamentary question in the Dail said: "Last year many fishermen over-fished and returned with more fish than they were supposed to catch and yet no decision was taken to take them off or remove them, which defeated the purpose of conservation. We have tried to deal with that issue this year by requiring fishermen to report to the CEO if they exceed their allocated tag numbers."

- TAC of 182,000 imposed for all commercial fisheries in 2003 - 17% cut from 2002,

- TAC to be consistent with national scientific advice by 2005, which implies further cuts are likely unless Irish stock abundance increases.

Since quotas started, and whilst they are not legally transferable, much cross area trading takes place, the Minister has accepted advice from the National Salmon Commission, and applied a TAC significantly above that recommended by the Standing Scientific Committee. The reported catches for 2004 are again less than quota. Many fishermen admit they are destroying the run and that available stocks are reducing. Salmon runs in Irish rivers were so poor this year that in August the Fishery Minister tried to make Irish anglers return all their September catch to support spawning stocks. He blamed over fishing at sea. Meanwhile Canada, Iceland, Scotland and North East England, where drift netting has been either ended or severely reduced, enjoyed near record runs. The SSC. Has proposed a quota of 122,000 for 2005. Acceptance and enforcement by government is most unlikely.

The true effect of this fishery upon the Southern European stocks is illustrated by facts, not estimates, in the tables below. They compare declared catches during the last three years with those of a decade ago, and demonstrate that the share of Europe's total catch, taken by Irish drift nets, has all but doubled compared to the previous decade. The actual number of salmon they have been catching recently is over 30% up. This is in clear contradiction of the claims, repeated by so many, that their exploitation has been reduced.

Total Catches ( tons)

(1) Ref: ICES statistics

(2) Ref: Central Fisheries Board statistics

Year Ireland
(all methods)
total (1) 		Ireland
drift net
catches
only (2)
 EU community
ICES-Southern
Europe region
total (1)
1991 404 267 1.145
1992 630 454 1.522
1993 541 380 1.443
Total 1.575 1.101 4.110
% 38.32% 26.79% 100.00%
- - - -
2001 730 620 1.242
2002 682 583 1.119
2003 575 471 932
Total 1.987 1.674 3.293
% 60.34% 50.84% 100.00%

Ireland drift net catches, numbers

Year Number
(2)
1991 91.031
1992 167.348
1993 138.969
Total 397.348
- -
2001 197.172
2002 179.177
2003 141.222
Total 517.571

This is a 30% increase in numbers caught

To this admitted exploitation must be added that of illegal fishing and seal damage. There is no exact science in these areas. In personal conversation with a retired Galway drift netsman, who had no axe to grind, he stated that toward the end of his career he suffered up to 30% seal damage and believed that further north the damage was up to 50%. Damaged fish are discarded at sea and neither recorded or reported to officials.

The Federation of Irish Salmon and Sea Trout Anglers carried out a survey in 2002/3. A summary of their findings follows. Whilst you may question the science, the fact that damage occurs cannot be denied and sizeable allowance for it must be included in any calculations of exploitation. So far no such allowance has been made.

FISSTA Survey of Seal production 2002 - 2003 (Transcript)

Region Fishery District Numbers
Landed 2002		 % taken by seals
2002		 % Taken by seals
2003
Northern Ballyshannon 15.285 60 72
- Letterkenny 23.858 60 67
North Western Bangor 10.196 55 57
- Ballina 35.380 63 61
- Galway 7.046 43 56
- Connamara 4.088 78 69
Shannon Lower Limerick 16.047 32 43
South Western Kerry 35.209 65 73
- Cork 19.166 26 37

Brian Marshall

Orri Vigfusson speech to the FISSTA AGM

North Atlantic Salmon Fund
Netting illustration

NASF's illustrated map

Written By: ORRI VIGFÚSSON

On Date: 16/11/2004

Speech by Orri Vigfusson, Chairman of the North Atlantic Salmon Fund to the AGM of the Federation of Irish Salmon and Sea Trout Anglers, Mansion House, Dublin, 14 November 2004 I am always grateful for an invitation to FISSTA´s annual meeting and I am delighted to be here. This time I am pleased to say that I have travelled in an optimistic frame of mind. There are two reasons for why I feel more cheerful. The first is the good season that has been enjoyed by all the areas where the salmon stocks are protected by NASF agreements, both on the northern feeding grounds and as the fish make their way home to their native rivers. Iceland, Canada and Scotland have had their best salmon runs for the last 20 - 30 years.
It means that all our work is beginning to pay off. It is absolutely necessary that we continue these agreements because inter-governmental treaties and talking shops are not going to do it for us. But it does cost a lot of money and finding it is far from easy.

I must remind you that, thanks to NASF, Irish salmon have been protected on their feeding grounds off Greenland and the Faroes for the last 15 years. But that has been achieved with the aid of other people's money. Ireland has only contibuted towards the costs in one of those 15 years - and naturally that was the private sector. And of course the drift netters, by far the greatest beneficaries of our work, have contributed absolutely nothing. I mention it because NASF will soon be appealing for donations to continue those agreements. I hope we can count on tangible support from Ireland.
Some of you naturally may ask, but has Ireland benefitted from the NASF buyout? The answer is yes indeed it has. When we started buying out the high seas quotas 14 years ago, Ireland share of the world catch was 14%. Now few years later, Ireland share has nearly doubled and currently runs as 25%- 27% of the world catch!
Having diverted briefly from my original path I must tell you that my second reason for optimism is the fact that we finally forced the Irish Government into retreat. They have stopped finding reasons for the continuation of the nets. Stopped talking. Stopped issuing bull'', scientific theories. Stopped consultations.
Instead, they are busy trying to avoid practical participation in the democratic processes to which they are a party. They are using all possible, and some impossible, arguments to avoid accepting Ireland's commitments under the international treaties that apply to salmon and the environment.
It is quite unacceptable that the economic review your government commissioned from the Farrel Grant Sparks consultancy has been prevented from reaching the public eye - just as publication of the Indecom Report was delayed. I fear that the authors are being pressurised to deter them from publishing their true findings.
No doubt many of you met and gave evidence to the FGS consultancy. Do you feel they listened to you?. I came to Dublin three times in good faith and offered them the details of some of the world's best managerial policies and principles. When I met with the consultants I asked if they were independent and free of any political shackles and if they could freely publish their findings. They said 'Yes'. Now I want to see that this has been allowed to happen or I shall demand my money back!
I want to tell you a little about our international scientific review team. Recently the NASF team met with the Lough Agency to review the salmon management of the Foyle District. To my astonishment we were presented with a spawning escapement model that is intended to show that it would be counter-productive to have more than 10.000 salmon going into the river system and that the draft and driftnets are necessary to prevent a spawning disaster.

A quick review of the facts by our team showed that at least 100.000 - not 10.000 fish - were actually needed to make this a fully healthy river system. We have therefore asked for complete details of the information and science on which the model used by the Lough Agency is based. Our experts will audit that data and in due course we shall publish our findings.

We would like to do the same for the spawning models used by the Republic of Ireland. We have the greatest of respect for your top scientists, Paddy Gargan and Martin O'Grady, both highly respected in international circles, But these so-called scientific models have to be built round so many subjective political assumptions that they are full of loopholes. We need to get our experts to subject them to very critical scrutiny. We must look at every detail, even those that may seem of little consequence, and expose the discrepancies that are caused by the need to follow a bad political agenda.

We must not let the Minister for the Marine forget that this autumn his predecessor, Mr Ahern, was blaming the drift nets for the shortage of potential spawners and demanding that anglers put back every salmon they caught. It was the drift netting supremo himself speaking and to my mind it was the best argument yet why the nets had to go and it came from those who have previously denied anything was wrong. This official admission of the destructive effects of drift netting needs to be paraded and hammered home at every opportunity.

Our efforts to use the EU Habitats Directive against the drift netting at last seems to be bearing fruit. Thanks to the ingenuity of Brian Marshall, chairman of the Wessex Salmon and Rivers Trust in Southern England, who discovered that the directive was intended to protect salmon from Special Area of Conservation rivers and candidate SAC rivers this campaign has steadily grown in strength.
It began with the Wessex Salmon lodging a formal complaint in respect of the Hampshire Avon. Urged on by Brian, other areas in the UK and now Ireland have also lodged complaints. Brian, who is leading the campaign, is grateful to those of you who have done this and says there is no doubt that the combination of these complaints has raised the temperature in the Commission and that he is very optimistic that the Irish Government wuill continue its retreat!
To help fuel the fire every English and Welsh MEP has received detailed letters from their local constituents asking for their involvement and fishery representatives from all the UK political parties are calling on both the EU Commission and Parliament for action.
Brian believes the Dublin authorities are now on the back foot. They have denied your Irish complainants and the Wessex Trust any sight of their defence so they obviously believe they may be called before an EU court. After Dublin's rather pathetic initial defence a new complaint was raised by the Commission itself. Now Irish representatives are pleading that there is no scientific proof that sea fishing impacts upon river stocks! Brian is grateful for all those who have given him data and says that on a daily basis he is now sending reams of information and data in answer to questions from Brussels. He tells me: Watch this space!

Meanwhile, we have been pursuing the rights that the UN Law of the Sea Convention gives to Ireland's neighbouring salmon countries. The Convention says that the stakeholders of any nation from which migratory stocks originate should be allowed to take part in managing those stocks when they are in the waters of another country. Clearly that covers the management of salmon from Europe and the UK while the fish are off the Irish coast.
Nearly two years ago we drew the Irish Government's attention to the Convention and demanded the right to share in managing the drift nets on behalf of a coalition of NASF supporters from Spain, France, Germany and Britain. The Irish Government agreed to the validity of our claim and promised to co-operate with us. Then, as appears to be standard policy when difficult issues arise, it quietly shelved its offer of co-operation and even refused to answer our letters. A few weeks ago I was in Dublin and complained about our treatment to the Irish Ombudsman. I am pleased to tell you that he has told the authorities in Dublin that they are in the wrong and that they must resume discussions with us.
I am sure I do not need to tell you how pleased we at NASF are at the Stop the Drift Nets Now campaign and the fact that Irish angling has got its act together and buried the old and very rusty hatchets that seemed to divide you. You probably don't know that at a NASF policy conference in the south of England last Spring we agreed that Ireland needed a United Front if the Berlin Wall around the government's support for drift nets was to be demolished.

The stop the Drift Net Now Campaign has the full support of NASF. The campaign was launched in remarkably short time and it is working well. I wish to pay a very warm tribute to Niall Greene and all those in FISSTA who have worked so hard to bring this about. Our congratulations and thanks also go to the far-sighted individuals and officials of all the other bodies who shared in the launch of this new body. It now seems that everybody in Ireland's private sector with interests in salmon angling now agrees that the drift nets are the real enemy and that so long as they exist everything else is of very little consequence. Let that be our warcry until this long battle is finally won. -

ORRI VIGFÚSSON