Letter to the newspapers
"Save our Western Lakes
from gillnets"

by Francis Barbé

I carry a certain level of sympathy with the local angler who hears "pike eat trout" and concludes "kill the pike!". That sympathy quickly disappears when I see that people in authority, people in charge of clubs and federations, people who should be better informed and therefore know better, carry the same simplistic view.

In the beginning of December last, Staff of the Western Regional Fisheries Board put a gillnet across the mouth of the Gleanntreag river; a major spawning river on Upper Mask . Those people in authority have no problem with that and the Chief Officer of W.R-F.B., Michael Kennedy even denies that the net was put across the river. I witnessed myself that, the W.R-F.B.-staff attending the gillnet, threw the ensnared trout (6 in one day, no pike present) up in the air to "release" them. Clearly, some of those trout were heavily pregnant.I note that Mr. Kennedy has no explanation for this unacceptable behavior. Even worse, the people in authority, who are I'm sure very concerned about the well being of the trout seem to have no problem with this "expertise" either. Just think. Think twice. A heavily spawn laden trout is cut free from the gillnet and if it still moves, is put back (or should I say thrown back in callous manner?). 5 of the 6 trout in the gillnet on that day were treated in the same way. Those 5 trout were all put back on the lakeside of the gillnet. Why do the "well-trained and experienced staff "of the W.R-F.B. who we are told received extensive training in the handling and caring of fish, not return the clearly heavily spawn laden trout back on the River-side of the gillnet? To prevent the trout, if it would survive it's first encounter with the gillnet, from having to run the wall-of-death again? Again, no explanation by W.P-F.B, no problem for those in authority of trout -clubs and federations

If we extend this recent experience of the use of gillnets to its use over the years on the Western Loughs, a few FACTS arise that give clear evidence of its negative impact on ALL fish stocks.

Gillnets do not select. All fish swim in them, be it trout-pike-salmon-perch etc. This was confirmed again only last week when figures of gillnetting efforts for the beginning of this year on Lough Mask were published. Over 40 trout swam in the nets, while only 20 pike were found. And if we may believe the, only recently, highly praised Chief Officer of the W.R-F.B, Mr. Michael Kennedy, who stated that "gillnets are basically fishing engines that capture fish for the purpose of killing them", it is easy to conclude in what state these trout are now.

Gillnets damage fish severely, if not mortally. In a recent article in the Western People by Sean Nixon called "Protecting our salmon for the future" I read: "When it comes to allowing monofilament nets for any fishing, a long bard look should be taken at all stocks of fish, and in most cases of faIling fish stocks. It is conservation that is needed, not monofilament nets." Can anyone tell me the difference between a salmon ensnared in a net at sea and a trout or pike ensnared in a net in the lake?

Gillnets are counterproductive. Figures from the Inland Fisheries Trust of their gilnetting practices between. 1961 and 1979 show clearly that the amount of netted pike more than doubled over that period, while the tonnage remained the same. The amount of trout found in the gillnets dropped from over 3000 in the first year to just over 500 in the last year! In other words; a sustained and intensive gillnetting increases the numbers of (small) pike while reducing the trout-stocks.

Gillnets reduce trout stocks. Of this no argument! This last conclusion is also confirmed by the figures over the years of the average trout-catch per rod per day. Trout fishing clearly got worse during periods of gillnetting than the periods without culling! These figures are not mine. They can be read in the W.R-F.B.- report on their 1996-survey. Thus confirming that other factors than pike predation are at work here.

Gillnets damage the national and international image of the Western Lakes. Tourism is an extremely important source of income in Ireland in general, and in the West in particular. Blind hatred for a fish species, namely pike, handed down from generation to generation and ignoring the pike's huge, already proven ability for off-season tourism makes the use of gilInets still an acceptable method of so-called stock management here in the West. While tourism providers and potential tourists react with dismay and disbelief when the reality is shown once more. Let's not forget that the purpose of the Corrib System Development plan is to bring in additional tourists!

With this knowledge in mind, I find it hard to belief that there are still people out there willing to defend the use of gillnets on the Western Lakes. Clearly there must be other reasons for their use. And other reasons for backing the people who use them.

Furthermore it dismays me and many others to see that local people, who don't agree with the current gillnetting-campaign, seem to be intimidated in an obviously orchestrated way. Mr. Malone has given proof on more than one occasion of his objection to the use of gillnets. Yet, this same man has done or tried to do more in recent years for the wellbeing of the Western Lakes and it's trout-stocks than anyone else. For example, I refer to his efforts to set up a trout-hatchery in Ballinrobe and his ongoing efforts to encourage people to use phosphate-free detergents. Yet, as for the first, his "three" was planted on sterile ground... Another man (Padraic Heneghan) who gave expression of his opposition to the use of gillnets was forced to leave his club. This club he helped found and loyally served for over 40 years. He did a lot of extremely valuable work on the spawning rivers in Tourmakeady and knew more about the fish and fishing than any of the people who forced him out in what was clearly an orchestrated way.

I could also mention the harassment of people who were watching the gillnetting operations on the lakes, while it has always been stated that this is an open and transparent Development Plan for all to observe. Furthermore I recall a meeting where I was personally invited by Mr. Kennedy to observe the W.R-F.B. practices on the lakes.

Whereas in the past opposition to the use of gillnets was blamed on foreign pike clubs, local disagreement around Lough Mask and Comb grows. Now more than ever ALL fish and fishermen seem to be more than likely victims of the negative impact which gillnets have on these wonderful lakes. The Irish movement "SAVE OUR WESTERN LAKES" grows by the day and any support or interest is welcome on PO. Box 0002, Cong Post Office, CLaremorris, Co. Mayo. Also, since recently, "SAVE OUR WESTERN LAKES" bas gone worldwide and it's website is to be checked out on the Internet on

http://user.online.be/danny.geysen/sowl/sowl.htm

GILLNETTNG : TO ERR IS EXPERIENCE, TO REPEAT IT IS A MISTAKE!

P. S. For the record, I have no commercial interest in angling tourism, only a great love for these lakes.