The EU nature restoration law is far bigger than simply rewetting and could affect up to 40% of Ireland’s land base, the Irish Natura and Hill Farmers Association (INHFA) has warned.

The hill farmer body called for greater engagement on the new law and a deeper understanding of the proposed legislation’s implications.

The law is being discussed by the agriculture committee of the European Parliament this week and an INHFA delegation is travelling to Brussels to brief MEPs.

“It’s vital that everybody here at home and in Brussels understands the full implications of this law,” INHFA president Vincent Roddy said.

“This is far bigger than just rewetting,” he added.

Designation

The INHFA maintained that 30% to 40% of the country’s land base could be affected by the law.

“While the law isn't actually recognised as a new designation, it will have the same effect as a designation and potentially could be more far reaching in terms of limitations and requirements on landowners,” Roddy explained.

“This law will apply on Annex 1 habitats as defined under Article 4 (1) of the regulation. Annex 1 habitats include all Natura 2000 lands and much more. It covers peatlands - including farmed and wet and dry heaths across our hills and in lowland areas - wetlands and habitats on coastal areas such as machair,” he said.

“So, on this basis, we could be looking at between 30% and 40% of Ireland’s land base,” Roddy estimated.

Restoration measures

The INHFA leader pointed out that restoration measures will be put in place on listed land until ‘good condition is reached’. There is also a requirement in the regulations that lands ‘do not deteriorate’.

These requirements illustrated a need for ongoing management, which was effectively a designation, Roddy maintained.

In addition, the INHFA has argued that Article 12 of the law appears to suggest that CAP supports could be withdrawn or repurposed if the provision of these payments was deemed to impede the achievement of goals identified under the nature restoration law.

“This, we believe, is a major threat to CAP payments. In fact, when you read this regulation, then you start to appreciate how damaging this could be, not just in terms of rewetting, but on a wider context for all farmers with Annex 1 lands,” Roddy said.

“And that is why we need greater engagement on this law. We walked into the original designations with our eyes closed. No one fully understood the long-term implications. We can’t make that mistake again,” he insisted.