The environmental targets set out for the coming years include an improvement in soil, air and water quality along with a reduction in emissions and an increase in native forestry. As discussed in last week’s article, there will be a much greater focus on environmental management under the next CAP.
REPS has also been highlighted as a tool that will be used to drive improvements in this regard.
We spoke to some experts in their respective fields to see where beneficial changes can be made and what factors need to be considered to get strong farmer buy-in.
Putting value on marginal land
James Moran, lecturer in ecology and biology,
Galway-Mayo Institute of Technology
Extensive grazing areas, dominated by a mixture of heathland, grasslands, wetlands and small fields with abundant hedgerows and remnant pockets of native woodland, were seen as marginal farmland in the past.
However, in modern agricultural systems where farmland is seen as much more than food production, this marginal land can be viewed as High Nature Value farmland (HNVf).
HNVf comprises places of quality food production and important areas for carbon storage, water quality, flood alleviation, nature and landscapes that attract tourists from around the globe.
Recent work highlights these areas cover approximately one-third of Ireland’s farmed area, almost 1.5m hectares. They are mainly located in upland areas in the south and east but extend to sea level in the west, and include iconic cultural landscapes such as Connemara and the Burren.
Approximately 50% of HNVf is designated as part of the EU Natura 2000 network, recognising its international importance for biodiversity.
The problem is agricultural policy to date has undervalued this land and it has suffered from deteriorating environmental quality.
The viability and environmental value of these areas can be improved if agri-environmental schemes reward farmers for producing the environmental products for which their land is naturally advantaged.
This can be done through incorporating results-based payments systems into our agri-environment schemes.
Extensive trialling has been carried out across Ireland on over 2,000 farms across wet grasslands in Leitrim, uplands in the east and intensive dairy areas in Cork.
Here, simple field and farm quality scoring systems have been designed for nature, carbon and water, similar to a condition scoring system for an animal. Crucially, they must be understood by farmers. If scores are low, farmers are eligible for supporting actions to improve them and their overall payments.
Simple farmer-centred plans must have clear targets adapted to the range of farmed landscapes.
They must also go hand in hand with improvements to hedgerows, field boundaries, rivers, ponds, small wetlands and woodlands.
This will ensure a modern agricultural system that produces quality food in a quality environment, essentially farming for people, nature and food.
Getting to grips with water quality
Noel Meehan, Agricultural Sustainability Support and Advisory Programme (ASSAP) project manager
There are two major issues when it comes to water quality and agriculture – phosphorus and sediment, and nitrogen.
They’re generally mutually exclusive and it mostly comes down to soil type. You can pretty much divide the country in a line from Louth to west Cork.
Where you have heavier soils with heavy rain, clay soils get saturated and the water sits there. When it moves it brings phosphorus and sediment with it and that can be washed into streams.
Nitrogen is the opposite. It causes issues on free-draining soils, generally at the shoulders of the year when there’s excess nitrogen – so in spring when growth hasn’t taken off yet or in the autumn when growth is declining.
Unfortunately, we have seen a decline in water quality in recent years. Some of it has been weather-related. For example, the 2018 drought caused increased nitrogen leaching while the recent heavy rainfall will cause more phosphorus loss.
The phosphorus issues are easier to mitigate because you can take physical measures on farms to negate it.
It moves through water over land so the aim is to stop it reaching watercourses. That starts with buffer zones and margins, leaving the required distance when spreading slurry and maybe permanently fencing some areas off, allowing vegetation to grow to block the flow of water.
There are also critical source areas. Every farmer knows the wet spots on their farm – they have to be managed more carefully. You’re aiming to avoid things like poaching and spreading slurry or fertiliser when there is a possibility it could be washed away.
The aim would be to graze these areas when it’s dry and leave drier fields for wetter times of the year. That can be difficult on some farms. Fencing off watercourses from animals is also a very practical measure.
The nitrogen question is harder to solve. It comes down to nutrient management. That is where engagement with farmers is absolutely crucial.
There needs to be an understanding of the problem and acceptance of the measures required to bring about change. There is no shortcut to that and farmers have to be part of the solution.
Ambitious targets to reduce greenhouse gas emissions
Lorcan Allen, Irish Farmers Journal
With Irish farming accounting for just over one-third (34%) of all greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in Ireland, the new REPS is seen as a key tool to help drive these changes over the coming years.
Ireland’s agriculture sector has committed to reducing its GHG emissions to a range of 17.5m to 19m tonnes of CO2 equivalent by 2030, which is a cut of 10% to 15%. However, it is likely the current Government will introduce new, even more ambitious targets for the sector to meet in the coming months.
What we are likely to see in the new REPS to help meet climate targets will be a range of results-based payments to farmers for making measurable changes on their farms.
For example, the Government plans to incentivise farmers to spread lime on their land to improve soil health.
Other farmers with heavy, peat-type soils could also be paid to rewet some of their drained peat soils in order to stop C02 emissions from these soils.
It’s likely farmers will also be paid to plant more trees on their farms as part of a small woodland on the farm or under an agro-forestry system, where livestock graze among trees planted in a spaced manner.
Additionally, farmers will be further encouraged to use low-emissions slurry spreading systems and grants are also likely to be introduced to support the installation of on-farm renewable sources of energy such as solar, small-scale wind and anaerobic digestion.
Starting point must identify what you want to achieve
Declan Byrne, project manager of the Wicklow Uplands Council’s Sustainable Uplands Agri-Environmental Scheme (SUAS)
Hill and mountain areas make up a large percentage of Ireland’s land area and are home to some of the richest HNVf. Management of these areas is complicated by the fact that they are diverse in nature and also, from a practical point of view, large areas are farmed as commonage and, as such, require commitment and agreement from a significant cohort of people to bring about real change.
The other challenge in driving change on hill and mountain areas is that many farmers are still slow to commit to schemes due to past policies which they feel may have not delivered, while having four different Government departments policing what farmers do and each having different objectives is not helping.
These Departments have never told farmers what they actually want to achieve for distinct areas. Blanket policies do not work and the starting point of any agri-environmental plan has to be looking at these areas and asking what exactly do we want to achieve.
All too often, measures are selected and then applied to an area. It must be the other way around – look and see what the issues are and then draw up an appropriate scheme covering your objectives.
Our experience in the SUAS project has shown that if farmers believe what they are doing is benefiting the area and their enterprises then getting farmer buy-in will not be a problem. The last step is rewarding farmers based on whether the work they have undertaken is delivering.
In terms of managing commonages, we have found that it is hard to look at them in isolation. For example, one commonage may have an objective of controlling heather and on the face of it look like the stocking rate may need to be increased. Bringing sheep into this area, if the vegetation is not fit to sustain higher numbers, may have negative effects on neighbouring commonages that are grazed optimally. For this reason, commonages must be addressed on an individual and regional level.
The GLAS programme had good objectives in this regard but much more can be done in a targeted way to improve the environmental benefits they offer.
“Things happen very slowly in the uplands and management may take many years to show results. Management plans for upland areas need to be for periods of at least 10 to 15 years. This will require longer agri-environmental schemes than our current five-year schemes or planned continuity from one RDP to the next to ensure long-term planning at farm level.”
The environmental targets set out for the coming years include an improvement in soil, air and water quality along with a reduction in emissions and an increase in native forestry. As discussed in last week’s article, there will be a much greater focus on environmental management under the next CAP.
REPS has also been highlighted as a tool that will be used to drive improvements in this regard.
We spoke to some experts in their respective fields to see where beneficial changes can be made and what factors need to be considered to get strong farmer buy-in.
Putting value on marginal land
James Moran, lecturer in ecology and biology,
Galway-Mayo Institute of Technology
Extensive grazing areas, dominated by a mixture of heathland, grasslands, wetlands and small fields with abundant hedgerows and remnant pockets of native woodland, were seen as marginal farmland in the past.
However, in modern agricultural systems where farmland is seen as much more than food production, this marginal land can be viewed as High Nature Value farmland (HNVf).
HNVf comprises places of quality food production and important areas for carbon storage, water quality, flood alleviation, nature and landscapes that attract tourists from around the globe.
Recent work highlights these areas cover approximately one-third of Ireland’s farmed area, almost 1.5m hectares. They are mainly located in upland areas in the south and east but extend to sea level in the west, and include iconic cultural landscapes such as Connemara and the Burren.
Approximately 50% of HNVf is designated as part of the EU Natura 2000 network, recognising its international importance for biodiversity.
The problem is agricultural policy to date has undervalued this land and it has suffered from deteriorating environmental quality.
The viability and environmental value of these areas can be improved if agri-environmental schemes reward farmers for producing the environmental products for which their land is naturally advantaged.
This can be done through incorporating results-based payments systems into our agri-environment schemes.
Extensive trialling has been carried out across Ireland on over 2,000 farms across wet grasslands in Leitrim, uplands in the east and intensive dairy areas in Cork.
Here, simple field and farm quality scoring systems have been designed for nature, carbon and water, similar to a condition scoring system for an animal. Crucially, they must be understood by farmers. If scores are low, farmers are eligible for supporting actions to improve them and their overall payments.
Simple farmer-centred plans must have clear targets adapted to the range of farmed landscapes.
They must also go hand in hand with improvements to hedgerows, field boundaries, rivers, ponds, small wetlands and woodlands.
This will ensure a modern agricultural system that produces quality food in a quality environment, essentially farming for people, nature and food.
Getting to grips with water quality
Noel Meehan, Agricultural Sustainability Support and Advisory Programme (ASSAP) project manager
There are two major issues when it comes to water quality and agriculture – phosphorus and sediment, and nitrogen.
They’re generally mutually exclusive and it mostly comes down to soil type. You can pretty much divide the country in a line from Louth to west Cork.
Where you have heavier soils with heavy rain, clay soils get saturated and the water sits there. When it moves it brings phosphorus and sediment with it and that can be washed into streams.
Nitrogen is the opposite. It causes issues on free-draining soils, generally at the shoulders of the year when there’s excess nitrogen – so in spring when growth hasn’t taken off yet or in the autumn when growth is declining.
Unfortunately, we have seen a decline in water quality in recent years. Some of it has been weather-related. For example, the 2018 drought caused increased nitrogen leaching while the recent heavy rainfall will cause more phosphorus loss.
The phosphorus issues are easier to mitigate because you can take physical measures on farms to negate it.
It moves through water over land so the aim is to stop it reaching watercourses. That starts with buffer zones and margins, leaving the required distance when spreading slurry and maybe permanently fencing some areas off, allowing vegetation to grow to block the flow of water.
There are also critical source areas. Every farmer knows the wet spots on their farm – they have to be managed more carefully. You’re aiming to avoid things like poaching and spreading slurry or fertiliser when there is a possibility it could be washed away.
The aim would be to graze these areas when it’s dry and leave drier fields for wetter times of the year. That can be difficult on some farms. Fencing off watercourses from animals is also a very practical measure.
The nitrogen question is harder to solve. It comes down to nutrient management. That is where engagement with farmers is absolutely crucial.
There needs to be an understanding of the problem and acceptance of the measures required to bring about change. There is no shortcut to that and farmers have to be part of the solution.
Ambitious targets to reduce greenhouse gas emissions
Lorcan Allen, Irish Farmers Journal
With Irish farming accounting for just over one-third (34%) of all greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in Ireland, the new REPS is seen as a key tool to help drive these changes over the coming years.
Ireland’s agriculture sector has committed to reducing its GHG emissions to a range of 17.5m to 19m tonnes of CO2 equivalent by 2030, which is a cut of 10% to 15%. However, it is likely the current Government will introduce new, even more ambitious targets for the sector to meet in the coming months.
What we are likely to see in the new REPS to help meet climate targets will be a range of results-based payments to farmers for making measurable changes on their farms.
For example, the Government plans to incentivise farmers to spread lime on their land to improve soil health.
Other farmers with heavy, peat-type soils could also be paid to rewet some of their drained peat soils in order to stop C02 emissions from these soils.
It’s likely farmers will also be paid to plant more trees on their farms as part of a small woodland on the farm or under an agro-forestry system, where livestock graze among trees planted in a spaced manner.
Additionally, farmers will be further encouraged to use low-emissions slurry spreading systems and grants are also likely to be introduced to support the installation of on-farm renewable sources of energy such as solar, small-scale wind and anaerobic digestion.
Starting point must identify what you want to achieve
Declan Byrne, project manager of the Wicklow Uplands Council’s Sustainable Uplands Agri-Environmental Scheme (SUAS)
Hill and mountain areas make up a large percentage of Ireland’s land area and are home to some of the richest HNVf. Management of these areas is complicated by the fact that they are diverse in nature and also, from a practical point of view, large areas are farmed as commonage and, as such, require commitment and agreement from a significant cohort of people to bring about real change.
The other challenge in driving change on hill and mountain areas is that many farmers are still slow to commit to schemes due to past policies which they feel may have not delivered, while having four different Government departments policing what farmers do and each having different objectives is not helping.
These Departments have never told farmers what they actually want to achieve for distinct areas. Blanket policies do not work and the starting point of any agri-environmental plan has to be looking at these areas and asking what exactly do we want to achieve.
All too often, measures are selected and then applied to an area. It must be the other way around – look and see what the issues are and then draw up an appropriate scheme covering your objectives.
Our experience in the SUAS project has shown that if farmers believe what they are doing is benefiting the area and their enterprises then getting farmer buy-in will not be a problem. The last step is rewarding farmers based on whether the work they have undertaken is delivering.
In terms of managing commonages, we have found that it is hard to look at them in isolation. For example, one commonage may have an objective of controlling heather and on the face of it look like the stocking rate may need to be increased. Bringing sheep into this area, if the vegetation is not fit to sustain higher numbers, may have negative effects on neighbouring commonages that are grazed optimally. For this reason, commonages must be addressed on an individual and regional level.
The GLAS programme had good objectives in this regard but much more can be done in a targeted way to improve the environmental benefits they offer.
“Things happen very slowly in the uplands and management may take many years to show results. Management plans for upland areas need to be for periods of at least 10 to 15 years. This will require longer agri-environmental schemes than our current five-year schemes or planned continuity from one RDP to the next to ensure long-term planning at farm level.”
This is a subscriber-only article
SHARING OPTIONS: