Dáil Éireann Debate, Tuesday - 23 June 2026
112. Deputy John Paul O'Shea asked the Minister for Climate, Energy and the Environment the specific recommendations contained in the Joint Research Centre review of the Blackwater fish kill incident; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [46942/26]
Amharc ar fhreagra113. Deputy John Paul O'Shea asked the Minister for Climate, Energy and the Environment the timeline for implementation of each recommendation contained in the Joint Research Centre review, the agency responsible for delivery; the current status of each recommendation; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [46943/26]
Amharc ar fhreagraI propose to take Questions Nos. 112 and 113 together.
Following the Blackwater fish kill incident last year, an independent review was carried out by the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC). The JRC Report, published in February 2026, made a number of recommendations aimed at strengthening prevention, detection and investigation of fish kills which are set out in the table below.
Many of these recommendations are being progressed through the development of an Inter-Agency Protocol between relevant agencies. This protocol, which will be finalised very soon, will ensure that the relevant expertise, resources and information are brought together quickly and will ensure consistency in how incidents are handled and communicated in the future.
The JRC report also includes some longer-term recommendations, such as continuous monitoring infrastructure, which requires careful planning, design and investment. Further consideration on how best to progress these is underway by the relevant authorities.
|
Objective |
Recommendations |
|
To Improve Detection |
• Major rivers (>100 km length) should have basic continuous monitoring with current and historical results available online. This should be provided together with ‘travel time’ catchment maps for different flow scenarios. • Chemical samples should be taken immediately when a fish kill is identified. This should be followed by frequent catchment-wide ambient water samples for complete background and pollutant specific chemistry for major fish kills. Local authorities should follow clear protocols to achieve this. • Given that the pollutant or its source has not been identified, vigilance should be maintained. Monitoring should be intensified in the river and its tributaries by IFI and CCC. • The public were first to raise the alarm. It is recommended to increase citizen scientist initiatives in the catchment led by LAWPRO and IFI. |
|
To improve the coordinated response |
• Designate one agency to be responsible for leading and directing the response. • Major fish kills need to be recognised as such and treated with a higher level of priority. IFI should lead work to develop procedures to quickly classify and quantify fish kill extent. • IFI should lead work to develop and agree a clear multi-agency operating procedure to deal with major fish kills. This should guide all agencies to urgently explore all possible avenues until a cause is clearly determined. As part of this, the EPA and IFI should review investigative monitoring protocols for local authorities. • All agencies should establish clear reaction time goals for i) cross-agency information sharing, ii) diagnosis & remediation, iii) ensure sufficient capacity to meet emergency needs. • Investment should be made in crisis management and crisis communication skills. • Reports should clearly document all suspected causes, subsequent investigations and outcome. The logical steps of an investigation must be transparent to the public. |
|
To prevent fish kills |
• Manage the catchment in an integrated way to allow a greater resilience of the biota to pollution events under scenarios that include high summer temperatures and low flows. • The EPA and IFI should commission and guide research to predict high risk locations for fish kills. Direct resources towards prevention. Anticipating and preparing for events will improve the response. • Carry out a thorough economic evaluation otherwise the resource will remain undervalued. • The deterrent to pollution under the Environmental Liability Directive and the Industrial Emissions Directive (including recent revisions) should be highlighted. However, without the identification of the pollutant and source, prosecutions and costs for remediation measures (under the Environmental Liability Directive) cannot be pursued. • Prevention of future incidents is paramount. Increased efforts by national authorities are required to adequately implement relevant existing Community legislation such as the Water Framework Directive, the Nitrates Directive, the Industrial Emissions Directive, the Urban Wastewater Directive as well as the Habitats Directive. Further efforts should be made to achieve the environmental objectives set by these directives within the catchment. In addition, the Environmental Liability Directive should be fully implemented to provide a strong incentive to avoid polluting the environment. |
