Given the impact of designations on farming practices in some areas of the country, it is fair to say many farmers are cautious when it comes to wildlife legislation.
Of course, wildlife legislation also sets out the timeframes for the open and closed periods for hedge cutting as well as managing deer and badger populations.
A public consultation on wildlife legislation was announced in June 2024 by the then Minister of State responsible for the National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS). It sought people’s views on priorities for any new legislation.
At the time, it was said two new wildlife bills and several new statutory instruments will be published arising from this.
The results of this were published in recent weeks, with submissions from farmers, their contractors and farm organisations.
Farm contractors
The targeting of members of the Association of Farm and Forestry Contractors in Ireland (FCI) by non-Governmental groups due to their work cutting hedges, was highlighted in the organisation’s submission.
The FCI outlined that this is “unfair, unorthodox and in some cases, illegal”. In this regard, the association took issue with the use of the wording “wildlife crime” in the outline of the public consultation.
It said there needs to be a greater focus on training and certifying operators, instead of “penalties, liabilities and sanctions”.
The association called for practical guidelines for rural roadside verge management during the summer that will enhance road safety for all users.
“It is now accepted that there is a road safety requirement under section 70 of the Road Traffic Act 1993 that verge trimming of vegetative growth is carried out during the summer months on dangerous sections of roads,” the FCI stated.
With regard to rural road verges, it said “an immediate programme should be put in place to allow for fast and practical decision-making processes and to allow local authorities to use the devolved power vested in them to deliver practical, workable and clearly proven road safety initiatives for rural road users”.
FCI is seeking practical guidelines for rural roadside verge management during the summer that will enhance road safety for all users. \ Philip Doyle
ICMSA
The Irish Creamery Milk Suppliers’ Association (ICMSA) was critical of the structure of the public consultation in its submission.
It said the consultation is incomplete in that it ignores the concerns of farmers and there is an emphasis on collecting opinions on “protection of all species and habitats while ignoring the concerns of the farmer”.
“In fact, the protectors of these important aspects of our environment are forgotten either by choice or design,” it added.
Farmers want to protect wildlife and biodiversity, the ICMSA said. However, it highlighted the impact of previous wildlife legislation on farmers, including designations.
“For example, where land has been previously designated, the landowner should be allowed to make an appeal against the designation at any stage.
“One could ask if the property rights of farmers are taken into consideration in this consultation and the previous iterations of the Wildlife Act.
“All questions within this consultation look to raise the bar, but do not consider the landowner who will be the one expecting to implement these regulations and whose farming practices/income will be impacted by any changes,” the ICMSA stated.
IFA
The Irish Farmers’ Association (IFA) put forward a number of proposals, among them that a new scheme should be introduced.
It said a farming for habitat and species payment could maximise environmental gain and compensate farmers who suffered a loss in income when European Innovation Partnerships (EIP) projects such as the Hen Harrier, Pearl Mussel and Burren Programme schemes end.
Hill and designated areas should be eligible for the payment, the organisation added.
The IFA also suggested that there should be no further restrictions on lands that are designated and that the whole operating system around designations should be reviewed as it is “not fit for purpose”.
On hedgerows, the IFA stated that policy incentives should be used instead of regulation to support hedgerow management.
The organisation called for a one-week grace period at the end of August to undertake necessary roadside hedge-cutting and legislation to facilitate local authorities in removing all trees that pose a safety risk as a matter of urgency.
Hill and designated areas should be eligible for a new payment for habitats and species, the IFA said. \ Michael McLaughlin
Over 300 submissions made to public consultation
The almost 300 submissions to the public consultation were made up of contributions from both groups and individuals.
Among those individuals was a dairy farmer from Co Tipperary who called for a media campaign to make landowners aware they can cut a tree where it poses a safety risk and for greater flexibility around hedgerow maintenance.
“It is not as simple as having a blanket hedgerow removal ban.
“This is because some farmers are left out of pocket by this ban with tiny unworkable fields for modern machinery to access.”
The farmer also outlined issues relating to deer in their area, including how these animals break fences and eat fresh grass.
On badgers, the farmer put forward that culling should be “retained until such time as a vaccine (for cattle) for the prevention of bovine TB is licensed for use in this State”.
Overall, the farmer was generally positive about the legislation. “Any drastic alteration of the document is unnecessary and would do more harm than good, in my opinion.
“Overall though, a less bureaucratic system with active engagement with farmers, landowners and hunting clubs would lead to a more pro-wildlife, informative approach, which would benefit all,” they added.
Given the impact of designations on farming practices in some areas of the country, it is fair to say many farmers are cautious when it comes to wildlife legislation.
Of course, wildlife legislation also sets out the timeframes for the open and closed periods for hedge cutting as well as managing deer and badger populations.
A public consultation on wildlife legislation was announced in June 2024 by the then Minister of State responsible for the National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS). It sought people’s views on priorities for any new legislation.
At the time, it was said two new wildlife bills and several new statutory instruments will be published arising from this.
The results of this were published in recent weeks, with submissions from farmers, their contractors and farm organisations.
Farm contractors
The targeting of members of the Association of Farm and Forestry Contractors in Ireland (FCI) by non-Governmental groups due to their work cutting hedges, was highlighted in the organisation’s submission.
The FCI outlined that this is “unfair, unorthodox and in some cases, illegal”. In this regard, the association took issue with the use of the wording “wildlife crime” in the outline of the public consultation.
It said there needs to be a greater focus on training and certifying operators, instead of “penalties, liabilities and sanctions”.
The association called for practical guidelines for rural roadside verge management during the summer that will enhance road safety for all users.
“It is now accepted that there is a road safety requirement under section 70 of the Road Traffic Act 1993 that verge trimming of vegetative growth is carried out during the summer months on dangerous sections of roads,” the FCI stated.
With regard to rural road verges, it said “an immediate programme should be put in place to allow for fast and practical decision-making processes and to allow local authorities to use the devolved power vested in them to deliver practical, workable and clearly proven road safety initiatives for rural road users”.
FCI is seeking practical guidelines for rural roadside verge management during the summer that will enhance road safety for all users. \ Philip Doyle
ICMSA
The Irish Creamery Milk Suppliers’ Association (ICMSA) was critical of the structure of the public consultation in its submission.
It said the consultation is incomplete in that it ignores the concerns of farmers and there is an emphasis on collecting opinions on “protection of all species and habitats while ignoring the concerns of the farmer”.
“In fact, the protectors of these important aspects of our environment are forgotten either by choice or design,” it added.
Farmers want to protect wildlife and biodiversity, the ICMSA said. However, it highlighted the impact of previous wildlife legislation on farmers, including designations.
“For example, where land has been previously designated, the landowner should be allowed to make an appeal against the designation at any stage.
“One could ask if the property rights of farmers are taken into consideration in this consultation and the previous iterations of the Wildlife Act.
“All questions within this consultation look to raise the bar, but do not consider the landowner who will be the one expecting to implement these regulations and whose farming practices/income will be impacted by any changes,” the ICMSA stated.
IFA
The Irish Farmers’ Association (IFA) put forward a number of proposals, among them that a new scheme should be introduced.
It said a farming for habitat and species payment could maximise environmental gain and compensate farmers who suffered a loss in income when European Innovation Partnerships (EIP) projects such as the Hen Harrier, Pearl Mussel and Burren Programme schemes end.
Hill and designated areas should be eligible for the payment, the organisation added.
The IFA also suggested that there should be no further restrictions on lands that are designated and that the whole operating system around designations should be reviewed as it is “not fit for purpose”.
On hedgerows, the IFA stated that policy incentives should be used instead of regulation to support hedgerow management.
The organisation called for a one-week grace period at the end of August to undertake necessary roadside hedge-cutting and legislation to facilitate local authorities in removing all trees that pose a safety risk as a matter of urgency.
Hill and designated areas should be eligible for a new payment for habitats and species, the IFA said. \ Michael McLaughlin
Over 300 submissions made to public consultation
The almost 300 submissions to the public consultation were made up of contributions from both groups and individuals.
Among those individuals was a dairy farmer from Co Tipperary who called for a media campaign to make landowners aware they can cut a tree where it poses a safety risk and for greater flexibility around hedgerow maintenance.
“It is not as simple as having a blanket hedgerow removal ban.
“This is because some farmers are left out of pocket by this ban with tiny unworkable fields for modern machinery to access.”
The farmer also outlined issues relating to deer in their area, including how these animals break fences and eat fresh grass.
On badgers, the farmer put forward that culling should be “retained until such time as a vaccine (for cattle) for the prevention of bovine TB is licensed for use in this State”.
Overall, the farmer was generally positive about the legislation. “Any drastic alteration of the document is unnecessary and would do more harm than good, in my opinion.
“Overall though, a less bureaucratic system with active engagement with farmers, landowners and hunting clubs would lead to a more pro-wildlife, informative approach, which would benefit all,” they added.
SHARING OPTIONS