The Department of Agriculture has been accused of putting in place a “misguided and misleading” appeals process for land classified as GAEC 2, which risked “confusing and intimidating” farmers.

Midlands-Northwest MEP Ciarán Mullooly criticised the Department’s requirement that farmers must confirm that the land parcels under appeal have never been drained - or confirm that any drainage works are planned for 2025.

“This demand completely misunderstands the purpose of the appeals process,” Mullooly said.

ADVERTISEMENT

“Farmers are appealing the peat soil designation because they believe it is scientifically incorrect – not because of what they plan to do with the land next year,” he added.

Mullooly stressed that the core issue is scientific accuracy in classification and he called on the Department to withdraw the “unnecessary conditions”.

“The decision on whether land is peat soil or not must be based on soil science – not hypothetical future land use or drainage plans. To suggest otherwise is to undermine the integrity of the entire process.”

This latest intervention from the Department risks confusing and intimidating landowners, particularly in the west and midlands regions, many of whom have contacted his office with concerns, the Midlands-Northwest MEP said.

“Farmers are entitled to have incorrect classifications overturned. That entitlement must not be made contingent on signing unnecessary undertakings or presenting irrelevant contractor paperwork,” he maintained.

The appeals relate to the categorisation of heavy lands under the GAEC 2 rules, which covers around 650,000ha and affects close to 35,000 farmers.

The farm organisations have also called on Department to amend its appeal process.

“For many farmers the issue around GAEC 2 lands isn’t necessarily about drainage, but the fact that the GAEC 2 standard has been incorrectly applied on non-peat soils,” said INHFA president Vincent Roddy.

IFA rural development chair John Curran said the GAEC 2 appeals should be available to all affected farmers.

“We have been getting calls from farmers for months now since indicative GAEC-2 maps were released saying there is no way individual parcels on their land are GAEC-2 and they will very much be contesting it,” Curran pointed out.

“They have to be given that opportunity, and, where backed by science and soil samples, have the GAEC-2 obligations removed,” he insisted.