Dail Committee on Castlemaine salmon fishery!
Here is the transcript for the recent Dail debate! I am going to do a year on year study on the fish counter data from the river Maine and send it into the committee to ask the IFI to answer!
Next is No. P00008/23 in which the petitioner, Mr. Daniel Brosnan, calls for legal netting of an endangered species, namely, Atlantic salmon, in Castlemaine Harbour to be stopped. Castlemaine Harbour is classed as a special area of conservation, SAC, where salmon are an actual quantifying interest. The petitioner maintains that the number of salmon returning is at an all-time low and adequate data are not provided by the fish counter on the River Maine.
The secretariat has received a reply from the inland fisheries division of the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications giving a detailed response to the questions raised by the petitioner. Among the questions raised in 2019, the petitioner asked if Inland Fisheries Ireland, IFI, could explain how the number of spring salmon and grilse could be exact. In its response, the IFI noted that as the counter was not operational during certain periods in March and April 2019, counts from the average of corresponding months in the previous five years was used. For May, the figure of 378 was inflated by 29% to account for this down time. For August, the figure was not updated as the period was short and unknown and escapement was low. For September, the escapement figure of 34 was inflated by 13% to account for this. It should be noted that the Maine is assessed as a single stock, that is, the grilse and spring salmon components are not considered separately for the stock assessment and the associated provision of scientific catch advice.
The petitioner asked IFI to explain how the number of grilse was so high and number of sea trout was so low in 2020. IFI responded that the number of grilse and sea trout reported to the technical expert group on salmon, TEGOS, for 2020 was based on the data recorded through the counter. On a precautionary basis these data are provided to TEGOS with an "unverified" status, given the conditions affecting the counter in terms of background noise and so on. Notwithstanding this, every effort is made locally to verify the accuracy of the counts by way of CCTV review to separate sea trout from salmon.
The petitioner also asked why verified video evidence has not been used in any year since the fishery reopened. The response was that the counter data from the River Maine provided annually to TEGOS for stock assessment and catch advice were classified as "verified" until 2017 when the status was changed to "unverified" due to concerns in relation to the background noise affecting the counter. This was done on a precautionary basis. As per above, the data are verified locally for accuracy. However, data are reported as unverified to TEGOS so that the group is aware of the conditions pertaining to the counter.
Regarding recommendations from the committee, the secretariat advises that the correspondence from the inland fisheries division of the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications be forwarded to the petitioner for comment within 14 days and that the committee writes to the clerk to the Joint Committee on Environment and Climate Action to determine whether the issues raised by the petitioner fall under the remit of that committee. The petition will be considered again once the relevant response have been received and the petitioner has been notified of same. Is that agreed? Yes!
Next is No. P00008/23 in which the petitioner, Mr. Daniel Brosnan, calls for legal netting of an endangered species, namely, Atlantic salmon, in Castlemaine Harbour to be stopped. Castlemaine Harbour is classed as a special area of conservation, SAC, where salmon are an actual quantifying interest. The petitioner maintains that the number of salmon returning is at an all-time low and adequate data are not provided by the fish counter on the River Maine.
The secretariat has received a reply from the inland fisheries division of the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications giving a detailed response to the questions raised by the petitioner. Among the questions raised in 2019, the petitioner asked if Inland Fisheries Ireland, IFI, could explain how the number of spring salmon and grilse could be exact. In its response, the IFI noted that as the counter was not operational during certain periods in March and April 2019, counts from the average of corresponding months in the previous five years was used. For May, the figure of 378 was inflated by 29% to account for this down time. For August, the figure was not updated as the period was short and unknown and escapement was low. For September, the escapement figure of 34 was inflated by 13% to account for this. It should be noted that the Maine is assessed as a single stock, that is, the grilse and spring salmon components are not considered separately for the stock assessment and the associated provision of scientific catch advice.
The petitioner asked IFI to explain how the number of grilse was so high and number of sea trout was so low in 2020. IFI responded that the number of grilse and sea trout reported to the technical expert group on salmon, TEGOS, for 2020 was based on the data recorded through the counter. On a precautionary basis these data are provided to TEGOS with an "unverified" status, given the conditions affecting the counter in terms of background noise and so on. Notwithstanding this, every effort is made locally to verify the accuracy of the counts by way of CCTV review to separate sea trout from salmon.
The petitioner also asked why verified video evidence has not been used in any year since the fishery reopened. The response was that the counter data from the River Maine provided annually to TEGOS for stock assessment and catch advice were classified as "verified" until 2017 when the status was changed to "unverified" due to concerns in relation to the background noise affecting the counter. This was done on a precautionary basis. As per above, the data are verified locally for accuracy. However, data are reported as unverified to TEGOS so that the group is aware of the conditions pertaining to the counter.
Regarding recommendations from the committee, the secretariat advises that the correspondence from the inland fisheries division of the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications be forwarded to the petitioner for comment within 14 days and that the committee writes to the clerk to the Joint Committee on Environment and Climate Action to determine whether the issues raised by the petitioner fall under the remit of that committee. The petition will be considered again once the relevant response have been received and the petitioner has been notified of same. Is that agreed? Yes!
 |
| Pat Buckley, Cork East |