Inland Fisheries Ireland (IFI) want to provide you with the best possible service. There may be times, however, when you think we could do better. And sometimes you may even want to tell us about something we have done well.
Whatever age you are, you have rights when it comes to a public service including:

• the right to have your say and be listened to
• the right to complain if you are not happy about something we have done.

In order to help you to do so we have set out all options open to you at the following link: Making a Comment, Compliment or Complaint

FRACKING

Q: What is IFI’s policy on Fracking?

A: IFI will comment on any applications that come before it on the basis of its responsibilities under the Fisheries Acts, Local Government (Water Pollution) Act and EU Directives.

Q: Has IFI commented on any Fracking Applications?

A: No applications have come before IFI.

FUNDING FOR ANGLING PROJECTS

Q: What is the Tús programme and how does it work?

Please see here for information on the Tús programme.

Q: What is LEADER and how does it work?

LEADER funding is administered by local companies also known as Local Action Groups (LAGs) who distribute grants and other supports to projects within their areas. Please see here for further information on LEADER funding.

Q: What is the Heritage Council Grants Programme?

The Heritage Council Grants programme invited applications for grants in 2012 under the following headings.

• Heritage Research provides assistance for data collection and research relating to Ireland’s heritage
• Heritage Management supports projects that apply good heritage practice to the management of places, collections or objects (including buildings)
• Heritage Education, Community and Outreach supports initiatives linking heritage to communities, promoting active engagement with and raising public appreciation of heritage.

The application process is now closed for 2012 but information on grants avaialble for 2013 will be available from October 2012. See here for more details on the 2012 grants programme.

How do I report a pollution event?

If you are concerned about the impact of any industrial or construction activity on the aquatic environment or if you discover a fish kill or suspicious discharge into a stream, river or lake you should phone 1890 34 74 24 or for easier recall 1890 FISH 24

During normal office number you may contact the Environmental Fisheries Officer of your local Inland Fisheries Ireland office using the details below:

• Blackrock Office. Tel: +353 1 2787022
• Clonmel Office. Tel: + 353 52 23624
• Macroom Office. Tel: +353 26 41221
• Limerick Office. Tel: +353 61 300238
• Galway Office. Tel: +353 91 563118
• Ballina Office. Tel: +353 96 22623
• Ballyshannon Office. Tel: +353 71 9851435

How do I report illegal fishing or poaching?

If you think you have witnessed someone fishing illegally or poaching you should  phone  1890 34 74 24 or for easier recall 1890 FISH 24

During normal office number you may contact the local Inland Fisheries Ireland office using the details below:

• Blackrock Office. Tel: +353 1 2787022
• Clonmel Office. Tel: + 353 52 23624
• Macroom Office. Tel: +353 26 41221
• Limerick Office. Tel: +353 61 300238
• Galway Office. Tel: +353 91 563118
• Ballina Office. Tel: +353 96 22623
• Ballyshannon Office. Tel: +353 71 9851435

Deep Sea Fish Farm Development in Galway Bay Bay

Inland Fisheries Ireland (IFI) is the statutory authority tasked with the responsibility for the conservation, protection and development of the inland fisheries resource and recreational sea angling. Recent legislative changes (SI: 477) have also tasked IFI via the Minister for Communications Energy and Natural Resources (DCENR) with additional responsibilities as part of Ireland’s implementation of the Habitats Directive, these include responsibility for the conservation of wild salmon, pollan, shad, smelt and lamprey.

IFI are the responsible agency in respect of the licensing and management commercial and recreational fishing for salmon, with protection responsibilities at sea out to 12 miles from baselines. Given the organisation’s close involvement with costal and island communities, IFI recognise and understand the pressures that these communities are experiencing. IFI understand clearly the impact that the closure and increased control of inshore fisheries for conservation reasons has had on these local communities. IFI is closely involved in supporting some of the former licenced commercial fishermen in their efforts to diversify out of salmon fishing.

IFI have been concerned regarding the negative impact of salmon farming on wild sea trout and salmon stocks, particularly in Connemara, since the late 1980’s. Sea lice infestation has been a particular concern. Many of the sites chosen to locate salmon farms were in shallow bays, close to river mouths where existing wild sea trout and salmon stocks existed these were not suitable locations for farming salmon from a wild fish perspective. Multiple farms in bays with two year classes of fish in close proximity lead to husbandry problems and lack of ability to control sea lice. While there has been an improvement in sea lice control recently, aided by lower stocking densities, fewer sites, and single generation sites, some existing locations remain a threat to wild salmonid stocks due to their proximity to rivers and problems with maintaining farm lice levels at a level whereby they do not impact on wild fisheries. IFI and its predecessors the Central and Regional Fisheries Boards have consistently sought the re-location of such farms away from river mouths. In this context, the proposal for a deep sea salmon farm in a more off-shore location is a move in the right direction. While such a location is not likely to encounter the same problems associated with farms in shallow bays close to river mouths, a more off-shore deep sea location is not without potential for negative impacts of wild salmon and sea trout stocks. The scale of the present proposal is of very significant concern as it provides for a greater production tonnage of salmon at this one location than is currently being produced nationally. In the past salmon farms were considered large when they were licensed for a harvest of 2000 tons – the current proposal is for a farm harvesting 15,000 tonnes based in two sites in Galway Bay. The comments of IFI on the EIS for this proposal are set out below.

• Submission by Inland Fisheries Ireland on the Environmental Impact Statement for a Deep Sea Fish Farm Development in Galway Bay Bay (351.14 kB)
• Factsheet on the impact of salmon farms on wild salmon and sea trout stocks (3.93 MB)

Use of Large Protection Vessels to police illegal fishing and co-operation with other agencies

What are the Cosantoir Bradan and the Bradan Beatha?

These are two Large Patrol Vessels (LPV) which were used for the monitoring of the salmon driftnet fishery in inshore waters by the predecessors to Inland Fisheries Ireland (IFI), the Central and Regional Boards.

Are these boats still in use?

The Bradan Beatha is now used by IFI to police illegal activity in inshore waters on an on-going basis. The nature of the fishery has changed and the deployment of the Bradan Beatha is to assist in the prevention of illegal salmon fishing and augment other methods in use such as Rigid Inflatable Boat (RIB) and Personal Water Craft (PWC) patrols.

The Cosantoir Bradan is now in use as a Geographical Survey Ireland (GSI) Survey Vessel. As and from October 11, 2012, this vessel will used as the INFOMAR Survey vessel. Information is available from www.gsi.ie.

Are there any synergies?

The Cosantoir Bradan will get create maps which IFI can use for the marketing of Wreck Angling. It will also provide excellent coastal mapping which will aid anglers in choosing appropriate fishing spots.

Is this a loss of protection capacity for IFI?

No, the nature of IFIs work has changed since the closure of the drift net fishery. Policing illegal activity needs to be immediate, effective and focused. The combined use of intelligence, RIBs, PWCs and the Bradan Beatha provide a more efficient reactive response. IFIs staff compliment has also decreased and can be better deployed on shorter, more focused operations.

Q: What are the legal methods of taking fish in freshwater?
A: The only legal method of taking a fish (any species) in freshwater is by rod and line. – The use of nightlines & hand lines is illegal.
Bye-law 897 of 2012 prohibits the use of any fish hooks, other than single barbless hooks, and the use of worms as bait in angling for all species of fish in the waters specified at the following link: ANGLING BYE-LAW NO. 897, 2012 [.pdf, 19 KB]

Q. Can I use live fish as bait in freshwater?
A. It is illegal to have or to use live fish as bait.

Q. How many rods can I use when fishing in freshwater?
A. A person may fish with not more than two rods at any time.

Q: Can I leave a rod unattended?
A: The placing of a rod unattended on the banks of any river or lake is illegal – any rod being actively used for fishing must be attended. An unattended rod is termed a fixed engine.

Q. Can I keep a foul hooked fish?
A. No, it is the killing and possession of foul hooked fish (i.e fish not hooked in the mouth) is prohibited.

ANGLING INFORMATION

Q: Where can I find information on going fishing in Ireland?

A: For all angling information, please refer to our angling website at http://www.fishinginireland.info/

Q: Where can I find the current salmon angling regulations?

A: Please see here for up to date information on salmon angling regulations in Ireland.

Q: Where can I find out about salmon fishing in Ireland?

Please see here for information on salmon fishing in Ireland

FISHERIES AWARENESS WEEK

Q: Where can I find out about Fisheries Awareness Week?

A: Please refer to our Fisheries Awareness website www.faw.ie for information on FAW 2012. As FAW 2013 draws closer, please check back for event information.

ACCESIBILITY

Q: I am a wheelchair user. Where can I go fishing in Ireland?

A: Please follow this link to a map of disabled angling stands in Ireland.

http://www.ifigis.ie/AccessibleAnglingMap/

Q: Is there advice available on the construction of wheelchair accessible angling stands?

A: Inland Fisheries Ireland is committed to improving and promoting access to angling facilities. Working with stakeholders we endeavour to improve the public’s angling experience.

A guide has been developed in consultation with the National Disability Authority (NDA), People with Disabilities in Ireland (PWDI) the Irish Wheelchair Association (IWA) and the National Council for the Blind in Ireland (NCBI).

There are many barriers experienced by disabled anglers when trying to participate in their leisure activity. For example people may have access issues where there is limited parking, fence crossings, cattle grids, steps or steep slopes. Easy and safe access to the water’s edge is critical to ensure effective participation by all.

The guide is divided into two parts; part 1 covers the standards of facilities provided to anglers visiting a location while part 2 deals with specifications for the construction of angling platforms, pegs and swims.

It is essential that all aspects of accessibility (parking, pathways and angling stands) be addressed collectively to ensure viable usage by all anglers.

Please note that this is a guidance document and more detailed best practice information is available in BS 8300 Design of building and their approaches to meet the needs of disabled people and the British Disabled Angling Association guidance document. It is recommended that you consult these documents before completing the design process.

This document shall be made available in alternative formats on request.

Guide to the Design of Accessible Angling Stands (1023.63 kB, .pdf)

ANGLING PROMOTION AND DEVELOPMENT

Q: Is sponsorship available for angling events?

A: Yes. However, the deadline for receipt of applications for the sponsorship in 2012 has now passed.

IFI, depending on the availability of funds, hope to provide sponsorship (funding and/or support) to groups, associations, clubs or other appropriate bodies to assist with events/items which meet the aims of the IFI Sponsorship Programme and advance the awareness of the inland fisheries resource, recreational angling and IFI in 2013. Further details will be announced here later in the year.

The IFI Sponsorship Programme aims to increase awareness of IFI, its work, recreational angling and the inland fisheries resource. IFI may support events on the basis of:

• Location and nature of the Event;
• Potential of the Event to introduce new users to angling in an active capacity, i.e. not just as spectators;
• Educate/Inform stakeholders of angling/environmental/commercial salmon fisheries/habitat issues;
• Development of non-established Events;
• An even distribution of sponsorship across all angling disciplines and all River Basin Districts;
• Events which include participants from some of the groups listed; people of different; ages, political opinion, race, religious belief, gender, marital status, sexual orientation, people with dependants, people with a disability, and members of the traveller community, are particularly welcome.

Events which will not be considered include

• The provision of hospitality, where the hospitality is the central or core aspect to the support sought from IFI;
• Events where the primary function of the Event is fund-raising;
• Events, which in the view of IFI, are economically viable without financial support from IFI; and
• Capital projects such as acquiring or developing new or existing buildings, infrastructure development or acquiring/maintaining equipment.

BIMs Fishfarm Proposal in Galway Bay

Does IFI have concerns regarding the proposal by BIM to locate a fish farm in Galway Bay?
IFI has expressed its concern in relation to the location and scale of the proposed fish farm in Galway Bay and how its development and operation would impact negatively on wild salmon and sea trout stocks and their habitat. IFI has also pointed out that the recognised negative impacts of sea lice on salmonids have not been adequately dealt with in the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) or the associated Natura Impact Statement (NIS). Recent findings show sea lice to have devastating effects on wild salmon, accounting for up to 39% of salmon mortalities.

IFI has provided detailed guidance on the measures required to address its key environmental concerns as part of its submission regarding the EIS and NIS Statements attached to this licence application. The compelling international evidence available to inform this issue clearly illustrates the negative links between unsustainable salmon farming and wild salmon and sea trout stocks.

See IFIs submission and a Factsheet on the Impacts of Salmon Aquaculture on Wild Salmon and Sea Trout Stocks at http://www.fisheriesireland.ie/Notices/deep-sea-fish-farm-development-in-galway-bay-bay.html
Press releases from IFI regarding the issues:
http://www.fisheriesireland.ie/Press-releases/wild-salmon-survival-in-the-balance-1-may-be-the-crucial-tipping-point.html
http://www.fisheriesireland.ie/Press-releases/national-inland-fisheires-forum-submission-to-the-department-of-agriculture-food-and-the-marine.html
http://www.fisheriesireland.ie/Press-releases/board-of-inland-fisheries-ireland-make-a-statement-on-proposed-offshore-salmon-farm.html
http://www.fisheriesireland.ie/Press-releases/devastating-impact-on-wild-salmon-populations-from-sea-lice.html

Has IFI received a response to its submission?
No response has been received to date.

Have IFI concerns in relation to the expansion of salmon farming as proposed been met?
No, IFIs concerns have not been met either by formal response or through the consultative process.

Is IFI in negotiations with BIM?
No, IFI is not in negotiations with BIM.

Has IFI had discussions with BIM?
IFI has offered its advice and shared its concerns relating to the associated NIS and EIS with BIM in discussions. This is not a negotiation, IFI is endeavouring to facilitate and foster an understanding of the issues raised in its submission to the EIS.

Does IFI have concerns regarding other aquaculture proposals?
As the state agency with responsibility for the protection, management and conservation of Ireland's inland fisheries and sea angling resources, IFI has been a consistent supporter of a sustainably developed aquaculture sector in Ireland for many years.

IFI’s position is that all planned aquaculture developments must fully consider and mitigate against any potential adverse impact on wild salmon and sea trout stocks in surrounding waters.

The Board of IFI have previously recommended the establishment of an independent three person group to examine the whole area of wild salmonid /  aquaculture interactions and make recommendations.

Why has IFI not appeared in public debates or on the Prime Time programme?
IFI has decided not to accept the opportunity to partake in public debate, as doing so might or be perceived as interfering in the formal review process which is on-going. IFI is satisfied that its submission, which is supported by international scientific studies, clearly sets out its concerns and recommended measures for mitigation.

Will IFI provide information or clarification in relation to its concerns?

IFI has informed the debate around this issue focusing on ensuring that any proposed salmon farm considers fully its impacts on wild salmonids; detailed information on IFI advice and observations in relation to this project are available on the IFI web site at www.fisheriesireland.ie/General/deep-sea-fish-farm-development-in-galway-bay-bay.html

Specific questions not answered in this FAQ or in the papers available should be forwarded to This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it .

If a kelt is caught accidentally by a an angler when fishing for a species other than sea trout or salmon he cannot record it if he does not hold a salmon licence. He must return it safely to the water immediately.

You may not kill a kelt or baggot under Irish fisheries laws. All unseasonable salmon and trout must carefully be returned. Unseasonable fish are defined as any salmon or trout which is about to spawn, or which has spawned and has not recovered from spawning.

ref: FISHERIES (CONSOLIDATION) ACT, 1959 - Part XI, Chapter 3, 176.

Q: Do kelts or baggots need to be recorded in my logbook?
A: Yes. All salmon (or sea trout over 40cm) caught need to be recorded in an anglers logbook. This is both a legal requirement and for gathering scientific data. Any salmon caught which is clearly a kelt from the previous season should be clearly identified as such in the entry. This is very useful data for Inland Fisheries Ireland so we appreciate anglers’ assistance in identifying such catches. If you’re not sure how to recognise a kelt see here (link to Q below).

Q: What is a kelt?
A: After spawning a salmon is called a kelt. A kelt is normally in poor condition but recovering to go to sea. In the act they would be termed unseasonable fish. Kelts start to drop downstream and begin eating to recover their condition. Female fish are the most likely to survive spawning because they head downstream immediately after laying their eggs. However, males remain in the vicinity of the redds looking for new females and fighting amongst themselves to mate with them. As a result, the majority of male kelts die in the rivers. The nutrients from their dead bodies are recycled into the food chain and benefit future generations.

Q: What is a baggot?
A baggot has different interpretations. Some say they are late running fish that never spawned or which have still to spawn. Others say they are fish which for some reason have failed to spawn at the appropriate time. In such cases the eggs may be degenerating and no longer viable. Either way baggots would also be termed unseasonable fish.

Q: How can I identify a kelt?
A: A kelt can be fully silvered but with a bit of a blue hue and can sometimes be mistaken for ‘clean’ fish (one which has entered the river and yet to spawn). However, kelts are in poor condition compared with clean fish, being thin and lanky in appearance with a soft body. The vent is often distended due to spawning and the belly is flat and hollow. Its fins and tail may be damaged or torn and it could have maggots in the gills. Kelts are aggressive feeders and easily caught. They often rest in slower areas of rivers.

Q: How can I identify a baggot?
A: Baggots are generally well proportioned and dark coloured, not dissimilar in appearance to coloured hens but their bellies are flabby. However, baggots can be distinguished from coloured hens by their soft flesh, distended bellies and sometimes open vents. Baggots can sometimes be caught in the spring on early rivers.

SALMON CONSERVATION and Regulations

Q: What rivers / lakes are open, closed or catch and release this year?

Please see here under the ‘Open fisheries’, ‘Catch and release only’ and ‘Closed’ tabs.

Q: Who decides what rivers are open / closed / catch and release only and how is this decided?
The Standing Scientific Committee (SSC) for salmon determine the conservation limit and surplus afforded to each individual salmon river within the state following which IFI Management make a recommendation on the future catch options for that river based on the best information available. These recommendations are submitted to the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources and following a period of consultation the Minister will make a decision on the future catch options associated with each individual river.

There are 148 listed salmon rivers in Ireland.  Each river has a given Conservation Limit.  The Conservation Limit (CL) is the number of spawning salmon required to produce the next generation of salmon. A group of expert fisheries scientists; the Scientific Standing Committee, develop the CL using the wetted area of each river along with its latitude to determine the number of salmon eggs required to populate this area. An assessment is made annually as to whether the conservation limit is reached on each river by using the average fish counter data, salmon rod catches, redd counts or by catchment wide electro-fishing from the previous 5 years of data. Following this assessment each river is given a catch option as follows subject to approval:

• Any surplus over the CL, the river can be allocated a quota for the harvest of salmon.
• If the river is meeting between 65% -100% of the CL the river can be opened on a ‘catch and release’ basis
• If the river is meeting less the 65% of the CL or has a rod catch of less than 10 fish the river will be closed for salmon fishing.

IFI forward the above advice to the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources who makes the final decision on the catch options each year following a public consultation process.

Q: What is the conservation limit for a river?
A: The ‘conservation limit’ for a river is the number of spawning salmon required to produce the next generation of salmon.  The conservation limit is fixed for each river based on the wetted area, latitude and other river specific factors, i.e. the proportion of one sea winter salmon and multi sea winter salmon in the population, the average weight of these salmon, proportions of male and female salmon and average numbers of eggs per female fish.

Q: How are Adult salmon Returns calculated each year?
A: The ‘Adult salmon returns’ is determined based on the counter figures where one exists or the rod catch figures (taken from the logbooks) from the most recent 5 years of data with an average figure derived.

Q: How is the surplus or deficit determined for each river?
A: The ‘Surplus’ or ‘Deficit’ for each river is determined by subtracting the ‘conservation limit’ from the 5 years average ‘Adult salmon returns’ specific for each river. The % of that rivers ‘conservation limit’ being met enables IFI Management to make recommendations on the catch options association with each individual river.

Q: What are the criteria for a river being closed / open on a catch and release basis or fully open?
A: A river meeting less than 65% of its conservation limit will be closed for all salmon fishing (unless catchment wide electrofishing results warrant the river been opened on a catch and release basis).  A river meeting between 65% and 100% of its ‘conservation limit’ can be opened on a catch and release basis for salmon and sea trout (over 40cm).  A river exceeding 100% of its conservation limit can be open to the harvesting of salmon and sea trout if the surplus is sufficient to warrant the harvesting of salmon and sea trout and there is no danger of the quota been exceeded.

Q: How is the Conservation Limit and Surplus derived ?

The Standing Scientific Committee (SSC) for salmon determine the conservation limit and surplus afforded to each individual salmon river within the state following which IFI Management make a recommendation on the future catch options for that river based on the best information available. These recommendations are submitted to the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources and following a period of consultation the Minister will make a decision on the future catch options associated with each individual river.

The ‘conservation limit’ for a river is the number of spawning salmon required to produce the next generation of salmon. The conservation limit is fixed for each river based on the wetted area, latitude and other river specific factors, i.e. the proportion of one sea winter salmon and multi sea winter salmon in the population, the average weight of these salmon, proportions of male and female salmon and average numbers of eggs per female fish.

The ‘Adult salmon returns’ is determined based on the counter figures where one exists or the rod catch figures (taken from the logbooks) from the most recent 5 years of data with an average figure derived.

The ‘Surplus’ or ‘Deficit’ for each river is determined by subtracting the ‘conservation limit’ from the 5 years average ‘Adult salmon returns’ specific for each river. The % of that rivers ‘conservation limit’ being met enables IFI Management to make recommendations on the catch options association with each individual river .

A river meeting less than 65% of its conservation limit will be closed for all salmon fishing (unless catchment wide electrofishing results warrant the river been opened on a catch and release basis). A river meeting between 65% and 100% of its ‘conservation limit’ can be opened on a catch and release basis for salmon and sea trout (over 40cm). A river exceeding 100% of its conservation limit can be open to the harvesting of salmon and sea trout if the surplus is sufficient to warrant the harvesting of salmon and sea trout and there is no danger of the quota been exceeded.

CRAYFISH

Q: Can I trap signal crayfish?

A: There are no signal crayfish or non-native crayfish in Ireland.  The trapping of crayfish is illegal as they are endangered. You can apply for a licence to carry out monitoring under the Wildlife Act which is enforced by National Parks and Wildlife Service.  There is a useful manual on their website. The local NPWS ranger will be able to help with any further queries.

Lagarosiphon Control in Lough Corrib

Why is Lough Corrib so important?
The Corrib Catchment constitutes an environmental resource of major international
importance. Lough Corrib itself is the second largest lake in Ireland (circa 18,000 ha) and is
one of the few large alkaline lakes remaining in Western Europe that is capable of supporting significant stocks of wild salmonid fishes. The quality wild salmon and brown trout fishing available makes Lough Corrib a major national tourist angling destination.

What is Lagarosiphon and what damage can it cause?
Lagarosiphon major (Curly leaved waterweed) is a high priority invasive species in freshwater systems. It was introduced to Ireland by the horticulture industry as an oxygenating weed for use in artificial lakes and ponds. It originated in Southern Africa. It was probably introduced into the lake from an artificial pond in the upper catchment.

It was first identified in 2005 in a few sheltered bays along the western shore of the upper lake. It is estimated that the weed was first introduced into the lake in the early 1990s. Since that time the weed has expanded its range and, by 2011, it was present in more than 160 bays in the upper and middle lake. Results from studies conducted by IFI has demonstrated that, if Lagarosiphon was to colonise all suitable habitat in the lake, it would overgrow some 11,000 ha or 61% of the area of this national aquatic resource.

No Lagarosiphon has yet been recorded in lower Lough Corrib and it is important that IFI and all stakeholder groups work together to ensure that it is not introduced here. The lower lake is shallow (mean depth circa 3m) and presents an ideal habitat for Lagarosiphon. If it becomes established in this basin it could totally overgrow this large expanse of water. The consequences for the ecology and amenity use of this area would be enormous but could possibly be overshadowed by the risks posed by water retention and consequent flooding.

At sites in Lough Corrib where Lagarosiphon has successfully established it has adversely impacted native plant, insect and fish communities. It also completely fills the water column and restricts water movement, which can result in elevated water levels during times of high rainfall.

What was done by IFI when Lagarosiphon was first identified?
In light of the known environmental and economic impacts that Lagarosiphon could have on Lough Corrib, a special Lagarosiphon Task Force was convened within weeks of the initial discovery of the weed. The objective of this Group was to propose coordinated actions that would help control the weed. Specifically, the Group would identify and source funds that would be used to conduct research into a diversity of methods that might control the spread of this invasive weed, and to raise awareness of the dangers that it poses.

What agencies collaborated with IFI in the fight against Lagarosiphon?
This Lagarosiphon Action Group comprised personnel from agencies including Central and Western Regional Fisheries Boards (now IFI), the National Parks and Wildlife Service, the Office of Public Works and Galway County Council, and the Heritage Council by way of funding.

Who funded research to identify control methods for Lagarosiphon?
Written proposals for funding to conduct research into the ecology of the plant and appropriate control methods were prepared by the Lagarosiphon Action Group in 2006 and 2007. The proposals were forwarded to a number of State bodies and agencies, and sufficient funding to permit the commencement of research activities on the lake was received from NPWS, OPW, Galway Co. Co. and the Western River Basin District. Subsequently, funding to continue research was secured from the EU Life+ fund to cover the period from 2009 to date. Additional funding has been received from the Heritage Council, Galway County Council and Galway City Council.

What weed control methods were initially considered to tackle Lagarosiphon?
The weed control methods that were selected for trial purposes on Lough Corrib were carefully considered and were informed by practical experience in Irish aquatic situations and based on best practice abroad. These included: manual removal using scuba divers, mechanical control and harvesting using traditional and innovative devices, light interception using black plastic and other materials and selected, approved aquatic herbicides.

Considerable focus was placed on research into the life cycle traits of the weed in an attempt to find a weak link that may be exploited.

What weed control methods were ultimately used to control Lagarosiphon?
Following extensive trials work with a variety of methods, the following proved most successful and contributed best to the removal of the weed from infested areas: manual removal using divers in areas where the plant is present with low abundance; mechanical cutting with paired V-blades or cutting knives, followed by meticulous weed harvesting; the approved aquatic herbicide Casoron G; and light exclusion using jute matting.

Why was the decision made to use aquatic herbicides in Lough Corrib?
The decision to trial the aquatic herbicide Casoron G on Lagarosiphon in Lough Corrib was based on more than 20 years’ positive experience using this product for aquatic weed control throughout Ireland and because of the excellent results that had been achieved using it for weed management in watercourses in the UK and in Europe. Scientific research conducted within IFI and abroad has clearly demonstrated that, where Casoron G is used according to manufacturer’s guidelines, it has little or no adverse impact on non-target organisms (be they plants, insects, fish or mammals).

Is Casoron G an approved herbicide for use in water?
Casoron G had full approval for use in aquatic situations by the Pesticide Control Service of the Department of Agriculture at the time it was used in Lough Corrib.

What is Casoron G?
Casoron G is a granular herbicide that contains 6.75% active ingredient (dichlobenil). The chemical name of dichlobenil is 2,6-dichlorobenzonitrile. Dichlobenil is metabolised by bacteria and microfauna in the mud to produce 2,6- dichlorobenzamide (BAM)

How does Casoron G operate?
The Casoron G granules are applied to the water surface directly above the area of lake to be treated. They sink directly to the lake bed from where the active ingredient (dichlobenil) is adsorbed onto the mud particles before being translocated through the target plant. Dichlobenil is poorly soluble in water and, as a consequence, there is a minimum of lateral movement in the mud. Thus, plants (or animals) that are not directly targeted by the granules are not impacted. This property of the herbicide is one of the reasons why IFI scientists favoured this herbicide for weed management purposes over others.

The dichlobenil residue in water almost completely dissipates in 5 to 6 months.

Dichlobenil affects growing points (interferes with cellulose production) in the plant and the herbicidal activity is characterised by a powerful inhibition of plant growth. It is particularly effective on young, growing plants. Rooted, submerged aquatic plants are most susceptible.

Are there any restrictions or exclusions pertaining to the use of Casoron G?
The product label indicates no restriction or exclusion from its use in water systems, once its use is approved by the appropriate regulatory agencies.

Has registration for dichlobenil been withdrawn by Europe?
The registration of all dichlobenil products (including Casoron G) was revoked in Ireland from 18th March 2009, under Commission Decision 2008/754/EC of 18th September 2008. A period of grace for the disposal, storage, placing on the market and use of existing stocks expired on 18th March 2010.

When did IFI last use Casoron G in Lough Corrib?
The controlled, targeted and localised use of Casoron G was continued until March 2010. Subsequent to this, IFI received an emergency derogation, in writing, from the Pesticide Control Service of the Department of Agriculture to treat localised patches of Lagarosiphon. The last application of Casoron G in Lough Corrib was made on 27th January 2011.

Does Casoron G effectively kill Lagarosiphon?
Trial results conducted in Lough Corrib indicated that Casoron G effectively and efficiently killed Lagarosiphon.

Is Casoron G used for wide-scale Lagarosiphon treatment in Lough Corrib?
Based on the positive results achieved during trials with Casoron G, it was decided to use it to treat relatively small and localised Lagarosiphon stands, particularly where no other control method was feasible. This included very shallow weed beds and small areas of lake where rock outcrops prevented access to weed cutting or jute matting boats. The majority of the sites treated in the lake between 2006 and 2011 measured less than 100 m2. Treatment sites were very localised and none were in the vicinity of water supply take-off points.
The area of Lough Corrib treated with Casoron G between 2006 and 2011, the quantity of Casoron G used each year during that period and the percentage of the total lake area treated are presented in the table below:

Are the after-effects of Casoron G on water quality and native plants, insects and fishes scientifically monitored?
Results from extensive research conducted abroad recorded ‘no detrimental effects to water chemistry’ from the use of Casoron G as recommended by the manufacturers.
Work conducted in US showed that, after 50 days, no dichlobenil could be detected in Chara (this is an aquatic plant species that is the cornerstone of productivity in Lough Corrib).

IFI has an ongoing monitoring programme on Lough Corrib, operated over the 12-month cycle. Water quality is assessed at sites in the upper, middle and lower lakes on a monthly basis and this intensive programme has been in place since late 2009. No adverse effects from the use of Casoron G have been recorded through this sampling programme. Galway County Council also runs a comprehensive sampling programme on Lough Corrib and report that the water used for drinking purposes continues to be in full compliance with standards in the EU drinking water regulations.

In addition, IFI regularly monitors the status of native aquatic plant, insect and fish communities in Lough Corrib. Results from regular surveys of each of these biotic communities have revealed the presence healthy populations throughout the lake, accepting the normal dynamic cycles that occur in nature. It is noteworthy that, in a number of areas where Lagarosiphon has been successfully removed using Casoron G., native plant and insect species have recolonized and virtually pre-Lagarosiphon conditions have been re-established.

Is Casoron G toxic to insects, fish or mammals?
Research conducted in the UK and the US concluded that the addition of dichlobenil to waters at recommended rates had no direct toxic effect on aquatic insects.
Similarly, there are no toxic effects to fish, particularly where the total area of water treated at any one time is less than 20% of the total surface area (as is the case in any treatment applied to Lough Corrib). Analytical results from the dissection of large numbers of fish, representing all species, that were captured during the IFI Water Framework Directive fish stock surveys of 2008 and 2011 revealed no liver tumours or obvious damage to the reproductive organs of these Lough Corrib fishes.

Analytical results suggest that acute mammalian toxicity to dichlobenil is low and, at the levels used in the lake, there is an enormous safety margin. Toxicity data suggests that the acute mammalian toxicity of dichlobenil is low (for rats and mice) and, when used at recommended rates there is an enormous safety margin. A yearling cow would need to drink about 6,250 l of water that contains the recommended herbicidal dose before registering any harmful effect.

As no Casoron G has been used in the lake since 27th January 2011, there is no chemical residue remaining in the lake substrate.

Dichlobenil is virtually immobile in still or slow flowing waters and even that small element of the chemical that may enter into solution following spraying will be diluted to undetectable limits in a very short period, particularly in a lake as vast as Lough Corrib. The product is designed in a manner that ensures practically all of the active ingredient is actively adsorbed onto the mud particles on the lake bed, leaving only minute quantities to enter into solution in the water.

What will happen now that Casoron G has been withdrawn?
IFI is confident that the correct decision was made by the collective of State agencies to use Casoron G to treat inaccessible and localised population of the highly invasive weed Lagarosiphon in Lough Corrib. The herbicide worked in an environmentally safe and effective manner, and yielded excellent results in respect of invasive weed control. In its absence it will be necessary to deploy more time consuming methods, such as manual removal using divers, to effectively treat these less accessible lake areas.

FEROX TROUT

Q: What’s happening in Lough Corrib and Lough Mask with ferox trout?

Ferox trout are large lake trout known to be genetically separate from the normal brown trout stock. These fish have being heavily exploited by angling in the recent past and little is known of their biology or spawning locations in major Irish lakes. A radio telemetry project began in 2005 to tag Ferox trout in Lough Corrib in an attempt to determine spawning locations with a view to protecting the stock for the long term. Over the three year period, 2005-2007, eighty Ferox trout were tagged in Lough Corrib. By radio tracking at spawning time, it was found that 82% of tagged trout were recorded in the Cong River. This tributary of Lough Corrib has been shown to be the primary spawning location for Ferox trout in the Corrib catchment. As a result of the findings of this study, a conservation bye-law was introduced in 2008 on the Cong River and Cong Canal to protect the spawning ferox trout population.

The study moved to the Lough Mask catchment in 2008 when 32 ferox trout were radio-tagged to determine spawning locations. A further 35 ferox trout were tagged in 2009 and 24 in 2010. The Cong canal, which connects Lough Mask and Lough Corrib, has been shown to be the primary spawning location of ferox trout from Lough Mask. Ferox were also recorded spawning in the Glensaul and Carhernagower rivers. Radio tracking with the assistance of the Air Corps greatly improved the detection of radio tagged fish. A three year battery life for tags will allow detection of tagged fish until 2012. A proposed outcome of the research project is to introduce conservation measures to protect ferox trout on the principle spawning streams of Lough Mask.

For further information please contact:

Dr. Patrick Gargan
Email:  This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
Tel:   +353 (0)1 884 2600

BROWN TROUT GENETICS

Q: Where have brown trout genetics been studied?

A: In 2011 three brown trout genetics research programmes were completed. The programmes in question were as follows;

• A study of brown trout populations in the Boyne Catchment.
• A comparable study of brown trout stocks in the Suir catchment.
• A review of the genetic status of brown trout populations in the Lough Ennell sub catchment area of the Shannon.

Q: Why study brown trout genetics?

A: There were a number of objectives in relation to these projects;

• To establish the “status quo” in relation to the genetic diversity of trout stocks in each of these areas – similar projects, already completed for the Mask and Corrib catchments, illustrated that there were identifiable  separate genetic subpopulations in all sub catchments which allowed one to assess the contribution of individual sub catchments to the adult “mixed stock” in each lake.  In the case of the Boyne and Suir Catchments it was hoped that the studies would enable one to assess the contribution of individual tributaries to the main stem stock and establish the extent, if any, to which there were individual main stem populations.
• All sub catchments in the Boyne and the main stem itself, downstream to Navan, were subject to an arterial drainage scheme largely carried out in the 1970’s. In contrast arterial drainage programmes in the Suir Catchment have been very limited in extent and largely confined to the Clodiagh and localised reaches in the Thurles area. It was hoped that a comparison of these two genetic studies (Boyne and Suir) would shed light on the extent, if any, to which arterial drainage might have altered (simplified) genetic diversity in the Boyne trout stocks.
• If the data from these studies provided one with the same complexity of detail evident in the Corrib and Mask Catchments then the results would prove invaluable in fishery management terms particularly in relation to the Boyne where large scale river enhancement programmes are in progress.
• All of the Lough Ennell spawning and nursery streams were subject to arterial drainage programmes in the 1950’s.In the 1970’s a persistent major cultural eutrophication problem lead to a virtual collapse of wild trout stocks in this fishery. When this problem was resolved in the late 1970’s major trout stocking programmes took place, both directly to the lake and into all the spawning and nursery streams. Subsequently in the 1990’s a major stream enhancement programme took place to improve the morphology and ecology of the channels thereby increasing trout production. While this programme was successful, leading to a doubling of the adult trout stock in the lake in recent years, two outstanding questions remain unanswered;

A – Did the drainage programme in the 1950’s lead to a simplification of the genetic nature of trout stocks in the various sub catchments?

B – Could the large scale stocking programmes to both L. Ennell directly and its stream catchments have altered the genetic nature of the trout stocks in this area?

It was hoped that this study would help to answer the above questions.

For more information on these projects and the results to date please see here.

CELTIC SEA TROUT PROJECT

Q: What is the Celtic Sea trout project?

A: The sea trout is the sea migratory form of the brown trout and is a popular target fish in rod and net fisheries of rivers and coastal waters around the Irish Sea, many of which are in decline. Current understanding suggests that the incidence of sea trout and the composition and status of their stocks is sensitive to the environments in which they live. Their complex life history features coupled with their widespread occurrence, makes sea trout a unique and potentially sensitive indicator of environmental change, integrating responses across diverse habitats.

However, major questions exist regarding understanding of sea trout, namely:

• where do they go at sea and how are their stocks interlinked?
• what is their marine ecology (feeding, growth, survival and life history variation)?
• what environmental and other pressures are they exposed to?
• how do their life histories (and thus fishery quality) respond specifically to environmental variation?

The Celtic Sea Trout Project (CSTP) intends to provide this missing knowledge and to translate it into fishery management and conservation benefits for countries bordering the Irish Sea.

For more information on the Celtic Sea Trout project, please see here.

Lough Corrib Survey

What is the survey about?

The last major survey of adult fish stocks in L. Corrib was carried out in 1996, some 15 years ago. In the interim there have been a number of significant ecological changes in the lake – two additional species are now well established (the aquatic plant called Lagarosiphon and Zebra mussels).  An additional fish species (Roach), first introduced to the Corrib in 1982 has now had an extended period to become established in the fishery. Currently there is considerable debate in relation to the status of trout stocks in the fishery. The proposed fish stock survey in 2012 would establish;

• The current status of the adult trout population, numerically, compared to 1996.
• The relative strength of individual year classes of trout present.
• Comparative growth patterns of adult trout presently compared to times past.
• The trout’s dietary habits in 2012, compared to 1996.
• This survey will also allow one to update the comprehensive existing genetic data base on the trout population
• Changes in the population dynamics of the other fish species present (perch, pike and roach), since 1996, will be evaluated. Research on other Irish lakes has shown that the establishment of Zebra mussel populations can result in the decline of Roach and Pike stocks.
• It provides an opportunity to reaffirm the status of the Char stock in the lake. Regrettably the 1996 survey suggested that this species had become extinct at that point in time.
• The survey will be used to update the information on the distribution of Lagarosiphon in the lake.
• Information compiled on the pike stock will “feed into” an on-going national Ph.D. study of this species.

Will there be any other benefits to the L. Corrib survey?

The fish stock assessment being carried out on L. Corrib will provide an opportunity to collect adult trout genetic samples, as was done in 2008. The results of which will contribute to the over-all management of the L. Corrib brown trout fishery. Genetic analysis of the trout samples will pin-point the origins of the adult lake brown trout stock and will also determine the percentage contribution being made by individual sub-catchments. Such information is invaluable in fishery management terms as it can help identify the less productive parts of the catchment which then could be addressed through river enhancement programmes.

What did the 1996 survey show?

Relatively poor trout stocks and a significant population of large pike.

Who is carrying out the survey?

Staff from Inland Fisheries Ireland are carrying out the survey. Both research staff from the IFI office in Swords, Co. Dublin, and field staff based around Lough Corrib will be involved in the fieldwork.

When is it happening?

It is intended to start the survey on Monday, February 27th and, weather permitting, to finish the sampling programme in two and a half weeks.

What does it involve?

The survey will involve the collection and processing of fish samples from a total of 250 sites – the same locations which were sampled in the 1996 survey. All trout captured alive in the survey nets will be scaled, measured and released alive. Pike ≥ 85cm in length will also be released alive. All other fish captured will be retained for analysis. In the 1996 survey a total of 130 trout were retained (dead fish in the nets) and the balance (358 trout) were released alive.

What percentage will the trout captured represent in terms of the stock in the lake?

Circa 0.1% of the adult trout stock of which approx. 88% will be released alive.

Where will the nets be set?

Nets will be set in the same locations that were used in 1996. 250 locations around the lake will be used. All nets are set to fish on the bottom, but in shallow areas (<2m depth) they will be fishing close to the surface. Anyone boating on the lake during this time is asked to keep an eye out and steer clear of marker buoys, especially in shallow areas.

What is done with the fish that are caught?

Any trout that are alive will be measured and released again. Pike over 85cm will also be measured and released. All other fish caught will be retained for processing. This involves measuring length, weight, etc. and stomach analysis to see what they are feeding on.  A genetic sample will also be taken from all trout samples.

How is this survey different from the survey in 2011?

The 2011 survey was a general fish stock assessment carried out under the Water Framework Directive (WFD), to give an overall assessment of all the fish species in the lake. It also used different netting techniques, which are used in all WFD surveys. The upcoming survey is targeted specifically at analysing adult trout stocks in the lake, and uses the same survey techniques as the 1996 survey so results can be comparable.

How many survey nets will be out every night?

A total of 25 gangs of survey nets will be set throughout the lake every night during the survey.

How will I know where nets are so I don’t drive my boat into one?

All nets will be marked at either end with a brightly coloured marker buoy. Each buoy will have IFI SURVEY printed on it.  Nets are set to fish in the bottom 2 metres of the water column, but in shallow areas this means they will be close to the surface. Please keep a look out for marker buoys during this period, and steer well clear.

What happens after the survey? Is there a report?

Yes. There is a lot of post-processing of fish, and data analysis to be carried out. This work is usually done over the autumn/winter months, when fieldwork has been completed, so the full report will not be available until this has been done. In the meantime, an interim report giving details on the numbers of fish caught, species composition, etc. will be uploaded to www.fisheriesireland.ie for public viewing. The reports from the previous WFD surveys are available to view/download on www.wfdfish.ie

What are the findings of the survey used for?

Fishery managers need good data in order to manage fish stocks. The results of this survey will allow IFI staff to determine if trout stocks are healthy, and if not, what actions need to be taken. The overall aim of fishery management on Lough Corrib is to provide quality game angling for local and visiting anglers.

What measures are being taken to stop the spread of invasive species?

Biosecurity is very important, and survey boats are not exempt from this. All equipment (boats , engines and other equipment) brought to L. Corrib to assist the survey will be  cleaned, treated chemically and/or frozen as appropriate to ensure that no biological material of any nature is introduced to the lake.

In order to ensure that the survey nets do not contribute to the spread of Lagarosiphon in the lake nets which pick up any weed, while fishing,  will be brought ashore, cleaned,  and blast frozen overnight to kill any weed fragments in the nets  before being reset in the lake.

Following the completion of this survey all nets and other equipment will be frozen and/or chemically treated as appropriate before being used for survey purposes on other waters.