HC Deb 18 January 1984 vol 52 cc421-8

Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Goodlad.]

10.57 pm
Mr. Jeremy Hanky (Richmond and Barnes)

While I wholly support the petition that I have just presented, the serious problem of the conservation of swans causes great anxiety to my constituents and to many other people throughout the country.

I have five objectives in raising this subject. The first is to alert the House, and through it the Government, to the current dramatic decline in the number of swans on the rivers of Britain. Secondly, I wish to make a plea to anglers to try the new non-toxic products that are available and to try to phase out the use of lead weights. Thirdly, I want to alert people throughout the country, especially the young, about what they can do to help when they see a swan in distress. I also make a plea for financial support for organisations that are doing much to help swans recover, such as the swan rescue service of the Save Our Swans charity.

Fourthly, I want to know whether the Minister is aware of the concern of his predecessor in 1978, the right hon. Member for Birmingham, Small Heath (Mr. Howell), about the state of the swans, who ordered an immediate inquiry, which culminated in the Nature Conservancy Council's report to the Government on lead poisoning in swans at the end of 1981.

Fifthly, I wish to ask the Minister for clarification on a point of law.

The number of swans in parts of Britain has declined seriously. It was noticed during the 1970s that flocks in many parts of the country were diminishing and by 1978 the famous flock of swans upon the Avon at Stratford had disappeared. Numbers on the Thames have declined dramatically. During the 1956 annual swan-upping there were found to be 1,311 swans and cygnets on the Thames. Between Putney and Henley in 1982 the figure had dropped to 255. Last year, there were 179.

The swan is the symbol of the Thames valley and of Buckinghamshire, the county of my birth. It is also on the coat of arms of my constituency borough of Richmond upon Thames and holds the proud position at the top of the civic crest.

Last year, only two swans were seen to be regularly resident on the Thames at Richmond. If the crest were being designed today, I wonder whether the swan would be considered. In ancient days there were hundreds of swans throughout England. It was a popular dish for the tables of kings. Even Mr. Drew Smith, the editor of the 1984 edition of the Good Food Guide, suggests that to improve banquets at Buckingham palace roast swan should be served to avoid a fruitless death in the annual cull. He also says that it would excite those who dine at the palace. I have bad news for Mr. Smith, a man whose culinary opinions, apart from this one, I always trust. The cull of swans has never been anything but the limiting of the number of eggs in swans' nests. It has never involved the killing of live swans. Not even a cull of eggs has taken place for over 15 years because of the serious decline in swan numbers.

I should hate to assess the state of Britain's diplomatic relations with our many allies throughout the world if, after serving roast swan at Buckingham palace to the heads of state and leaders of Government, we laid them waste through a severe dose of lead poisoning.

Lead weights are not only the most common but the most avoidable cause of death among swans. I recognise that there are other causes of death. The serious dispersal problem has added to the decline of swans in certain places because of increasing boating habits. With boating comes dredging and the food source for swans disappears, forcing them to leave their familiar habitats and move to other sites such as reservoirs and lakes. Boating also disturbs the river bed, preventing weed growth. The influx of Canada geese has also caused a decline in swan numbers in some areas. I have also heard of how the herbicides and insecticides used by modern farmers cause death among swans that wander from the river bank.

I have figures for the Thames, following counts for the dyers and vintners companies and the Keeper of the Queen's Swans in 1953. Then there were well over 1,000 swans. In 1983 there were well under 200 swans on the main part of the Thames. Of the 19 swans that underwent a post-mortem in 1983, particularly from the Kingston-Richmond stretch, 17 died as a direct result of lead poisoning. Both Mr. Cobb of the dyers and vintners companies and Captain John Turk, the Keeper of the Queen's Swans, agree that the main cause of the swan decline is lead poisoning. I stress that it is not the only cause by any means.

One reason is the swans' feeding behaviour. There natural food is submerged aquatic vegetation which they find on the river banks. When swans up-end they can reach with their long white necks to depths of up to 1 metre. Swans are unlike mammals in that they do not have teeth. They grind their food by the use of a muscular organ called the gizzard. They take in about an eggcup-full of grit each day. This is held in the gizzard and used for grinding. Unfortunately, swans grovel around for their grit and are likely to pick up anglers' weights. These also are held in the gizzard. Because lead is soft, it is quickly ground to a size that can be absorbed into the blood system. The lead is carried about the body where it causes damage to various organs and body processes. If I am upsetting hon. Members, I can assure them that it upsets the swans more.

The symptons of lead poisoning are characteristic. One characteristic is paralysis. This results in the impaction of food in the swan's gullet. The gizzard ceases to grind and the food cannot be moved along, but the swan continues to feed. As a result food becomes blocked, sometimes all the way from the gizzard to the head. That gives the swan a thick-necked appearance which is depressing to see. I shall not go into the other symptoms.

Externally the swan's neck appears short and kinked. Due to paralysis, it is unable to hold its head upright in the position for which it is so well known. Instead it rests the lower part of its neck on its back. The swan gradually becomes more lethargic and gradually stops eating and swimming. The condition declines until death occurs. That can be as little as two weeks after the onset of symptoms. An acutely lethal dose of lead is estimated to be only eight lead pellets.

The symptoms of lead poisoning are seen not only in the white swans over one year old but in the cygnets of only a few weeks. The birds in the city flocks are most prone to picking up weights. These birds are important because they are the next generation of breeding adult birds. Their deaths represent the loss of potential offspring.

The Edward Grey institute of field ornithology at Oxford university has carried out detailed research into the cause of death of swans in the past few years, and I pay tribute to its careful research, which has added scientific truth to what has long been suspected. The institute's research has been in two areas, one the post mortem analysis of swans found dead along rivers and the other the analysis of blood samples in living swans.

Between October 1979 and October 1981, of 94 swans given a post mortem, it was found that 54 had died as a direct result of lead poisoning, that three had been killed by fishing tackle, 16 by power cables, four as a result of disease, that five had been shot—some by arrows and some by guns — and the cause of death of 12 was unknown. In other words, nearly 60 per cent. had died because of lead weights. That is, however, 60 per cent. of the swans found and given a post mortem. In each period since then it has been confirmed that between 60 per cent. and 66 per cent. of swans are consistently killed by lead poisoning.

These figures are taken from the Thames as a whole, but the percentage of lead poisoning deaths rises dramatically the nearer to my constituency one goes down river. For instance, in the upper Thames and its tributaries, 19 per cent. of swans die from lead poisoning; around Oxford and Abingdon, 57 per cent.; around Reading and Henley, 80 per cent.; and around Windsor and Richmond, 85 per cent. Regular searches for lead weights are carried out in Richmond and between February and August 1983, a monthly average of 167 weights per 10 sq m patch of bank were found there, enough to kill 21 swans.

I want also to beg anglers to try out new weights, such as stainless steel, putty or tungsten shot, and I congratulate anglers on what they have done already. I, too, have spent hundreds of hours happily fishing, mostly on the sea, but my father was, and my elder son is, a keen river and lake angler. The angler holds an appropriate place on our British river bank, which he shares with the swan. I want to help them to live together longer. Indeed, I sometimes wonder which came first.

I congratulate the fishermen, who have tried to be careful with their lead shot, and I praise the initiative shown by the Angling Trades Association in issuing spillproof dispensers. I congratulate match fishermen on having given a helping hand in the development of "Anglers Weight", one of the new non-toxic products that came on the market this year. I congratulate all those anglers who are aware that lead shot is one of the causes of the decline of swans. I merely ask that they try a little harder before it is too late. Fishing is the most popular sport in Britain and I want it to remain so, but I also want one of our most popular birds to survive on the Thames.

My third plea is to young and old people to recognise the sagging neck of a swan that is suffering from lead poisoning. The Standard, "John Craven's Newsround", The Sunday Times through its "Watch" column and the RSPCA have all tried to make people aware of that so that they can tell the RSPCA or the swan rescue service of "Save Our Swans" so that suffering swans can be picked up and cured, as many of them are.

I also make a plea to those who feel able to give support to the swan rescue service with funds. Dr. Steven and Mrs. Zyllah Cooke have done much to save swans once they have been found to be ill, but it is an expensive process and they are desperately short of money. Other organisations, such as the Barnes wildlife and animal welfare group, of which I am proud to be a member, have done excellent work and have been pointing out for over 10 years the dangers of swan decline.

My fourth objective in raising this debate is to ask the Minister whether he is aware of the concern shown by his predecessor in 1978. The report that was made as a result of the action of his predecessor involving the Nature Conservancy Council investigating the lead poisoning of swans was produced at the end of 1981. It recommended that lead weights should be phased out of use by 1986, and there was a pledge at that time that another look would be taken at the problem in 1984. We are there now, and I believe that the Minister recently received a report from the Nature Conservancy Council. May we know its contents? Local fishing groups are helping tremendously with the agreement to try to end the use of lead shot, so long as alternative products are available.

My fifth point is about the law. The Thames water authority is unsure whether Schedule 3(21) to the Salmon and Freshwater Fisheries Act 1975, which allows water authorities to specify the equipment that can be used for fishing, applies to the conservation of swans and other wildlife or merely to fish stocks. It says, when specifying the purposes for which byelaws can be made: Specifying the nets and other instruments (not being fixed engine) which may be used for taking salmon, trout, freshwater fish and eels and imposing requirements as to their construction, use, design, material and dimensions, including in the case of nets the size of mesh. They would like to know whether that may be used in cases where swan stocks are dangerously low, to restrict the use of lead weights, for a time anyway, so that stocks can be built up again.

The riparian councils, which already own some of the river, do, from time to time, regulate the use of angling rights, and Reading council carried out an excellent experiment recently to see whether a short ban, with the complete co-operation of the angling organisations, would help the swans, as it did.

It used to be said that if the ravens left the tower of London, the tower would fall. A similar tragedy would be felt by all if those majestic and once proud birds, the swans, should ever leave the river Thames.

11.10 pm
The Under-Secretary of State for the Environment (Mr. William Waldegrave)

I pay tribute to the well-researched and eloquent speech of my hon. Friend the Member for Richmond and Barnes (Mr. Hanley). If he makes speeches about conservation as good as that, he will be a welcome support to any hon. Member who holds my office. I am only sorry that there was nobody on the Labour or Liberal Benches to hear that speech, and particularly that there is nobody on the Liberal Benches. I not only sought the advice of my Department and the Nature Conservancy Council for my answer to the debate, but also that of my hon. Friend the Member for Cambridge (Mr. Rhodes James), without whom it is unwise to move in such matters. He was able to tell me of an occasion when Mr. Disraeli first met Gladstone, a Liberal Member at that time, at dinner, and swan was on the menu. Although this may be a poor story to tell on an evening such as this, Mr. Disraeli recorded in his diary that it was the "best company there".

The subject that my hon. Friend the Member for Richmond and Barnes has brought up is a serious and a sad one. As he said, lead poisoning of swans is a serious problem, which causes acute concern to all of us who care for our wildlife, and these particularly beautiful creatures. My hon. Friend has already given most of the background details, but I hope that he will not mind if I run over some of the ground again, with a few additional facts.

The problem of the poisoning of swans by lead was brought to the attention of Government in 1979, when it was discovered that the number of swans on the river Avon at Stratford-upon-Avon had declined dramatically. My hon. Friend was right to pay tribute to the right hon. Member for Birmingham, Small Heath (Mr. Howell), who was the Minister responsible then, and to his initiative in this matter. The right hon. Gentleman asked the NCC for a report on the reasons for the decline in the number of swans on the Avon and to make recommendations to correct the problem.

Following an initial consultation with angling bodies and the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, the NCC advised the Minister that the marked decline was probably due to a number of factors including lead poisoning, industrial pollution, increased disturbance from boating and dredging, and a reduction in riverside and aquatic vegetation. The Minister subsequently asked the NCC to set up a working group to carry out a comprehensive review of lead poisoning of mute swans and to make recommendations for remedial action.

The working group, which included representatives of angling bodies, produced a detailed report, which was published in December 1981. The report concluded that mute swans were dying on the Avon and elsewhere as a result of lead poisoning caused by ingestion of fishing weights, especially split lead shot.

My hon. Friend has covered much of this ground, but I shall explain to hon. Members how the swans become poisoned. Lead poisoning occurs because, to break down and digest vegetation, a swan ingests large quantities of grit and gravel, which are retained in the gizzard. There was much muttering about the similarity between this mechanism and my hon. Friends who work for the Patronage Secretary. I did not hear all that. Swans, unfortunately, are unable to distinguish between grit and lead shot and inevitably ingest quantities of discarded shot when feeding. I am advised by the NCC that ingested lead affects the neuro-muscular system and that nerves and muscles cease to function. Eventually the swan dies of starvation, even though its gut is full of food — a horrible and sad death.

I add for completeness that the report noted also that the incidence of swan deaths appeared to be greater on waters that were poor in aquatic plant life. That suggested to the working group a possible correlation with boating since aquatic plants do not thrive in waters where there is heavy boat traffic.

The working group report recommended a number of courses of action, the most important of which were: first, that the code of practice for anglers, developed by the National Anglers Council should be given maximum publicity; secondly, that the use of split-lead shot by anglers should be phased out within five years; thirdly, that research and development of acceptable non-toxic alternatives to lead should be pursued vigorously; and, fourthly, that the Nature Conservancy Council should review the position in 1984 to establish how far the programme for action had met with success.

My colleague and predecessor in this responsibility, in a written reply to Sir Frederick Burden on 10 December 1981, welcomed the report on behalf of the Government and concluded with these words: I hope that all bodies who have a concern in these matters will use their best endeavours to implement the report's recommendations and combine to alleviate the suffering of our swan population and to eradicate its causes." — [Official Report, 10 December 1981; Vol. 14, c. 487.] More recently, in April last year, the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution, in its report on lead in the environment agreed with the NCC report. The Royal Commission recommended: Urgent efforts should be made to develop alternatives to … lead fishing weights As soon as these alternatives are available, the Government should legislate to ban any further use of lead shot and fishing weights … where they are irretrievably dispersed in the environment. The Government have made the following response to the Royal Commission's report: The Government strongly support the recommendations of the Nature Conservancy Council report on lead poisoning of swans: that urgent efforts should be made to develop alternatives to anglers' lead weights, and that efforts should be directed to the phasing out of lead in angling within 5 years (from 1981). Research into suitable alternatives is well advanced and the Department of the Environment will continue to monitor progress towards the substitution of lead within the timescale suggested by the NCC. The Government hope that a withdrawal of lead can be achieved by voluntary means, but legislation will be considered if necessary. That is still the Government's position. It shows our resolve to remove the major cause of suffering to these beautiful birds.

Returning to the original recommendations of the NCC report, I shall outline to the House the progress that is being made. First, the code of practice for anglers, drawn up by the National Anglers Council, was published early in 1982 and was given wide publicity with the assistance of the angling press, the tackle trade, angling clubs and water authorities. I pay tribute, as did my hon. Friend, to the full co-operation of the responsible people involved in angling. That was the first significant step towards a wider understanding among anglers of the indirect effects of their activities. I record my appreciation of the positive way in which all these organisations have responded to the problem. Not only have they speedily published the code of practice but I thank them for their contribution to the original working group and subsequent discussions with conservation bodies.

Secondly, significant progress has been made also towards the development of alternatives to lead. My hon. Friend made that point. Lead has several properties—density, malleability, insolubility and tenstile strength—which joined to its relative cheapness have made it the universal choice of fishermen for weighting their lines.

The development of a suitable alternative has, therefore, posed great technical difficulties, but I am happy to report that various commercial interests have risen to the challenge and independently produced at least two different materials composed of non-toxic substances that might be used as a substitute for lead. As my hon. Friend said, one of these firms has already launched its lead-free product and another hopes to be able to make its lead-free substitute available at retail outlets before the start of the next coarse fishing season in June. It remains to be seen how far these alternatives will be adopted by fishermen as entirely satisfactory alternatives. I hope that the House will agree that this is satisfactory news.

Meanwhile, other measures are being taken within the trade. It has been recognised for some time that significant quantities of split-lead shot which become dispersed along river banks are accidentally spilled from the containers in which they are sold. Therefore, the Angling Foundation and the Angling Trades Association have developed a spill-proof dispenser which should already be widely in use. It is expected that nearly all, if not all, anglers' lead shot will be marketed in these spill-proof dispensers by the start of the forthcoming coarse fishing season. That development should immediately reduce the amount of lead shot which is dispersed and I regard it as a useful interim measure.

Another of the report's recommendations was that the use of lead should be phased out within five years. I have already said that the Government fully support that timetable which gives a clear deadline of December 1986 and hope that this will be achieved by voluntary means. I have also reported the significant progress which has been made in the development of alternatives. Much will depend on their suitability if voluntary withdrawal is to be achieved within the time scale.

The Nature Conservancy Council has been keeping in close contact with the angling associations and has recently agreed to meet them in February to discuss the mechanisms for implementing a voluntary ban when the results of field trials on the alternatives are expected to be available.

The NCC was also recommended in the report of the working group to review the overall situation in 1984. This it is undertaking and it is well aware of the need to advise my Department on the key question — whether legislation will be needed — when the review is completed. As my hon. Friends know, my Department is always reticent about bringing forward legislation.

I should now like to say something about swan populations, and especially to deal with circumstances on the Thames which is naturally of concern to my hon. Friend the Member for Richmond and Barnes through whose constituency the river flows. Nevertheless, he is the trustee of many hon. Members on this matter.

I shall deal first with the national situation. At the time of the working group report the most recent information available was from a national census in 1978. It showed a total population of between 17,800 and 18,400 birds — a decrease of between 8 and 15 per cent. since a similar survey in 1955. However, comparison of the data from those two surveys showed important regional differences in the swan population. They showed that increases had occurred in the northern half of Scotland, north Wales, and parts of eastern and southern England. Marked declines were noted in central and southern Scotland, north-west England, the midlands, south Wales and the lower Thames.

At the time it was concluded that nationally the population of mute swans was not seriously threatened but that there was a prospect of a continued slow decline. No more recent data are yet available but a national swan census was carried out by the Wildfowl Trust and the British Trust for Ornithology in 1983. The information is currently being collated and analysed and will be available later this year.

As I have already said, the lower Thames is one of the areas which has long been identified as a black spot. Indeed, my hon. Friend has mentioned a quite alarming situation in the Richmond area, where ony two Swans have been sighted recently. My hon. Friend gave the information provided by the annual swan-upping counts. I confirm what he said and shall not repeat it. Much of that decline can be attributed to the effect of lead poisoning.

My hon. Friend also gave records of post mortems, which I can also confirm. Post mortems on 19 birds collected between Kingston and Putney which were examined in 1983 by the Edward Grey Institute of Field Ornithology, which was named after my mother's godfather who was a Foreign Secretary and a famous ornithologist at Oxford, showed that 17 had died from lead posioning caused by ingested fishing weights. Like my hon. Friend, I pay tribute to the institute for collecting and analysing swan data from the Thames, and to the Ministry of Agriculture veterinary investigation laboratory at Sutton Bonnington, which assists in the work of the Institute by carrying out analyses of tissue and blood lead levels and has carried out post mortems on many birds from other parts of the country for many years. That work has added considerably to knowledge of the problem.

My hon. Friend is quite rightly horrified by the scale of the problem in his constituency which appears to be just about the most inhospitable habitat for swans in the whole country. As I have said, however, action to eradicate the problem is being taken and will continue to be taken.

My hon. Friend asked about the Salmon and Freshwater Fisheries Act 1975 and whether the powers of water authorities to make byelaws under that Act can be used to restrict or ban the use of lead shot. The present advice is that water authorities probably could use such powers to that end, provided that they had reasonable grounds for imposing such restrictions. That might be important.

Although the great majority of anglers, as my hon. Friend said, are co-operative, sensible and perfectly justified in their use of the rivers and towpaths, there is one other measure that may have some deterrent effect on the small minority of irresponsible people involved. That is the Litter Act 1983, which makes it an offence to deposit litter in public places. This can, of course, include the discarding of anglers' lead shot. I hope that mention of this legislation will remind all fishermen, in particular that irresponsible minority, that, by carelessly discarding lead shot, not only are they endangering the swans but they are technically breaking the law.

In conclusion, therefore, I can do no more than repeat the Government's firm commitment to the phasing out of anglers' lead and to confirm that we will not hesitate to legislate if it proves necessary. Nevertheless, I am sure that we all hope that the cessation of the use of lead shot in angling can be achieved voluntarily.

I pay tribute once again to my hon. Friend for bringing up a subject that is important and about which the Government are greatly concerned.

Question put and agreed to.

Adjourned accordingly at twenty six minutes past Eleven o'clock.