Farmers have lost out on places in the Agri-Climate Rural Environment Scheme (ACRES) because the agricultural consultant they employed to lodge their applications had been de-listed by the Department of Agriculture.

The farmers report that they were completely unaware that the prominent agricultural consultant in the west of Ireland had been removed from the Department’s list of approved consultants.

Some farmers only realised that they were not in ACRES when the programme was already closed.

ADVERTISEMENT

The Department of Agriculture has insisted that it is not to blame for the farmers’ omission from the agri-environment scheme.

Farmers who have spoken to the Irish Farmers Journal said they were informed by the Department that no special concessions would be made for late applications to the environmental scheme.

If these farmers are unable to join ACRES at a later date, they could potentially lose ACRES payments of thousands of euro.

Department investigation

When asked by this newspaper if a prominent west of Ireland agricultural consultant had been de-listed, the Department replied that it “does not comment on ongoing investigations”.

The Department statement went on to dismiss any suggestion that it was in any way negligent by not informing clients of the de-listed agricultural consultant that they should secure the services of another adviser.

Farmers' 'responsibility'

In fact, the Department insisted that it was the responsibility of individual farmers to make sure that they used an approved agricultural consultant.

“In the case of ACRES, there were over 700 advisers approved by the Department to submit applications,” the Department stated.

“This list was published on the Department’s website in advance of the opening of ACRES and this link was available to all farmers with a reminder that they should only engage a FAS [Farm Advisory System] and ACRES approved adviser.

"Any arrangements between a farmer and their adviser after that are a matter between both parties,” the Department maintained.

However, this position is not accepted by the farmers involved, who maintain that they should been informed directly.