Anglers' Code: Swans (Hansard, 22 January 1985)

§ Viscount Mersey
My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper.

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, this code of practice was issued by the national Anglers' Council. The results of the latest Nature Conservancy Council's sponsored research into swan deaths are currently being collated and analysed.

§ Viscount Mersey
My Lords, I thank my noble friend for that reply. Would he not agree that so far there is no really effective substitute for the angler's lead weight because the present substitutes, such as the Sandvik Safeweight, are both more expensive and less efficient; and, furthermore, that any angler going into a tackle shop to buy a substitute more expensive weight would almost be admitting his own incompetence? He will be saying. "I am the sort of angler who 108 will drop his weights into the river or upset them on the river bank".

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, as far as my noble friend's last point is concerned, I would say that any angler could in certain circumstances be in danger of losing a weight, no matter what it is made of. I personally know of two alternative lead-free substances which have been developed by commercial interests and are being manufactured and sold to anglers—a tungsten-based polymer and a tacky rubber-based powdered steel mixture. The latter is, volume for volume, the same price as lead shot, and is re-usable.

§ Lord Melchett
My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that the latest figures for swans on the Thames show a continuing decline in the population and continuing very high levels of lead and deaths from lead poisoning? Will he acknowledge that the reply to his noble friend sitting behind him that anglers are not buying the available substitutes which, as he correctly said, are available at the a same price, takes us inescapably to the conclusion that the Government must legislate to ban the use of lead weights by anglers? Will they do this immediately?

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, the Government have repeatedly stated their policy that lead shot should be phased out by the end of 1986; if possible by voluntary means. But may I go on to say that we shall not hesitate to use legislation if it proves necessary. However, we all very much hope that a voluntary approach, which is the Government's approach to conservation in general, will be adequate in this case.

§ The Earl of Radnor
My Lords, is my noble friend aware that on the lower Hampshire Avon, which is a body of water that is heavily fished, the swans are still of more nuisance to the anglers than are the anglers to the swans?

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, I was not aware of the conditions on that particular water; but nonetheless more swans are at risk from lead shot than from any other cause.

§ Lord Elystan-Morgan
My Lords, is the Minister aware that we on these Benches appreciate the problems that are caused in this situation of a balance between the rights of anglers, on the one hand, and the demands of conservation on the other? Does he stand by the undertaking given by his noble friend Lord Avon on 31st October last year that legislation would be brought in to bring about the substitution of lead shot with a reasonable alternative if there is demand for that? Does he accept that it appears that none of the three main pieces of legislation in this field—the Cruelty to Animals Act 1876, the Protection of Animals Act 1911 and the Animal Health Act 1981—has any sanction whatever and that fresh legislation will be necessary? Will he consider further, as an alternative, the possibility of having non-fishing zones where, although it might be impracticable to try to corral swans completely to such areas, it might well achieve the main purpose of the objective?

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, that was a long list of supplementary questions and I am not sure that I followed the noble Lord's last point. However, of course I stand by the answer of my noble friend Lord Avon to the Written Question put by the noble Lord, Lord Houghton, in October last, which is what I sought to explain in reply to an earlier supplementary. To turn to the three pieces of legislation to which the noble Lord referred I do not have them before me; but, so far as I know they will be totally unusuable in this context.

§ Lord Melchett
My Lords, the noble Lord did not answer my question about the population of swans on the Thames. Can he also say what evidence, if any, the Government have to suggest that the effect of voluntary banning of lead weights by anglers is working? All the evidence that I have seen suggests that it is not working and that the Government will have to legislate. The sooner they do so, the better.

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, if the noble Lord is pressing me to give figures for the deaths of swans on the Thames during the past three to five years, or whenever, I am afraid that I am not in a position so to do. I am well aware that there is significant cause for concern, especially in the upper reaches of the Thames. The noble Lord's other point was whether voluntary conversion—if that is the word—would work? These products have been available on the market only since June last year. As such they have had only one fishing season in which to prove their worth. Anglers are by nature a rather conservative body of sportsmen and I do not think that it is reasonable for the noble Lord to expect this sort of approach to work overnight.

§ Lord Elystan-Morgan
My Lords, does that mean that the phasing out which the Nature Conservancy Council recommended by the end of 1986 and which the Government have undertaken to bring about, therefore cannot be brought about before the end of 1986 because the Government will not be in a position to estimate how may anglers have adopted the alternative product?

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, I have already said that unless the voluntary arrangements are fully operational by 1986 and proving successful the Government will not hesitate to legislate on this matter.

§ Baroness Nicol
My Lords, is the Minister aware that in addition to the lead shot which may have been spattered round the grouse moors in the past year, 250 tons of lead in the form of lead shot have been left on the river banks? Is he aware that there is an appliance which will allow anglers to feed out one shot at a time from it? Does he not consider it worth while to encourage the use of this? Furthermore, does the Minister know that the figures for the deaths of swans from lead shot poisoning are ready available from the Royal Society for Nature Conservation? The figures for the past three years are: 3,000 cygnets and 6,000 older birds. Will he not agree that these are disgraceful figures? Will he therefore press the Government to take action?

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, I was specifically asked about figures for the Thames, which I said I did not have. However, I am informed by the Nature Conservancy Council that its information is that there were 9,000 deaths to cygnets or swans in the past three years.

§ Lord Ponsonby of Shulbrede
My Lords, it is the same figure.

§ Lord Skelmersdale
Yes, my Lords, but not the same figure as for the Thames which I said I was unable to answer. As regards the box which dispenses lead shot individually, yes, it does exist; it is on sale to anglers and anglers have been purchasing it. However, I am unable to tell the noble Baroness in what kind of quantities.