I welcome Mr. Michael Canny, assistant secretary of Dúchas, and Dr. Alan Craig, director of Dúchas. Before they commence their presentation, their attention is drawn to the fact that while members of the committee have absolute privilege, this same privilege does not apply to witnesses appearing before it. Members are also reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that members should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses or an official by name or in such a way as to make that official identifiable.
Dúchas: Presentation.
Mr. Michael Canny
I apologise if we held up the committee. We were meeting the Minister.
I have seldom heard a better excuse.
A Deputy
Did they reach an agreement?
Mr. Canny
We agreed to meet the group again.
I will first provide some background information which may answer some of the questions members of the committee will probably ask later. Ireland is a very important place for birds because we are at the southern end of the flyways for the arctic birds, such as geese, ducks and waders, which come here for wintering. Other European birds come here for the summer and spring for breeding and we are also important for seabirds because our coastline has good, safe breeding places.
Legislation for the protection of birds has been in place here since the 19th century. However, in the late 20th century a much more organised approach to environmental issues developed as concern about them increased. This more systematic approach to bird species was reflected in the conservation of wild birds directive. As the birds migrate over long distances, the directive provides for a network of sites in all member states. One has to protect the breeding and feeding sites as well as the roosting and wintering areas. Article 4 of the directive requires us to designate special protection areas in order to make a network of areas to protect both endangered species and migratory species. There are 175 species listed in Europe as being endangered in various forms of which 28 are regular visitors to Ireland, the main ones being the green and white-fronted goose, Whooper swans, Bewick swans, corncrakes, species of tern, falcons, merlins and the hen harrier, which I will refer to later. We have to create special protected areas for all of these.
First, priority was given to the migratory species, particularly the wetland ones. The criteria used was that if a wetland supports 20,000 or more waterfowl or more than 1% of the migrant population of the species it is regarded as being of international importance and therefore qualifies for designation. For example, we have 25 bays and estuaries around the coast that have more than 1% of the north-east Canadian population of Brent geese. Two of our sites have 70% of the north-west European population of roseate terns. We are also an important site in regard to green and white-fronted geese.
We have been implementing the birds directive since 1985 and to date we have 110 sites and a total of over 220,000 hectares which are nearly all coastal or freshwater wetlands and a lot of sea bird colonies and some large terrestrial sites. In March of last year we advertised 25 new sites and nine extensions to existing sites. They were notified to landowners and advertised in the papers. Last November we advertised the middle Shannon callows as a special protection area.
There is an ongoing dialogue between ourselves and the European Commission, and between other member state governments about the adequacy of designations. From this process we have agreed in principle to designate additional sites this year. These will be sites for wintering water fowl in estuaries and bays, some small islands and inland lakes and also some for the dispersed species such as the hen harrier. At the moment we are looking at the suitability of a range of upland areas for designation in respect of the hen harrier. There is a concentration of these areas in the south-western counties, Cork, Kerry and Limerick. The hen harrier is one of our rarest birds of prey. We have completed preparatory scientific work on the suitability of potential sites. We are now trying to define the boundaries of those.
I must stress that none of these areas have been formally proposed for designation. When we have finished the scientific evaluation it will be for to the Minister to decide which sites should be formally proposed. When this has been done we will have a full notification and consultation procedure as was gone through last year with the other ones. This procedure involves the notification in writing to all landowners that we know of in the area. To ensure that everybody has been contacted we put advertisements in the local papers and on local radio and we display notices in the local authority offices, Garda stations, offices of Teagasc and the Departments of Social and Family Affairs and Agriculture and Food. We notify all Departments and any other relevant bodies. Once the sites are published there is a period of three months in which to make objections. The objections are first of all evaluated by staff of the Department and in cases where they do not propose to recommend an amendment there is an independent appeals advisory board which will assess the objections and make a recommendation to the Minister. This board has a balanced representation of landowners, user organisations and conservation bodies with an independent chairman.
In general, in the context of special protected areas, existing farming activities are almost certain to be fully compatible with the conservation requirements of hen harriers or the other birds involved. There is no conflict between the birds and traditional hill grazing. We do not expect there will be any need to make restrictions on existing farming activity. If there is a need to restrict activity of one form or another, compensation is offered. Farmers who are in the REPS scheme get a higher level of payment if they are in a special protected area. There is also a standing commitment to pay fair and reasonable compensation to other landowners for actual losses incurred as a result of restrictions.
The other big issue is development within SPAs. I will be very specific on this one. The designation of land as an SPA is not intended as an inflexible barrier to future developments. In this context I draw the committee's attention to the fact that large parts of Dublin Bay, Cork Harbour, the Shannon Estuary, Galway Bay and the Boyne Estuary are designated as SPAs and, as everybody knows sustainable——
With all due respect, there are no farmers in those areas.
Mr. Canny
No, but there is a huge amount of development going on in these areas. Sustainable ports and ancillary developments co-exist with the protection of birds. New developments happen in these areas as well.
In regard to planning applications, planning authorities are obliged to provide in their development plans for the appropriate protection of these areas. They must consider the likely effect of a particular development on an SPA and if necessary get an environmental assessment carried out. If they do not envisage a significant impact on the natural environment the planning application can be processed without an environmental impact assessment.
Forestry development is controlled under a consent system administered by the Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources. It is governed by procedures similar to those in regard to planning legislation. It is a complex task to balance and reconcile the requirements of afforestation, wind farming and nature conservation but practical solutions will have to be found and implemented. Our national climate change strategy envisages a doubling of the current overall extent of afforestation from 9% to 17% and a doubling of the contribution from renewable energy by 2005 and then following that with more ambitious targets. Side by side with that, the protection of Annexe 1 bird species such as the hen harrier has also to be promoted.
Much effort and investigation has been made to reconcile the different requirements involved. While solutions are still being developed and will differ according to geographical circumstances, at this stage, it is not the case that the requirements of hen harrier conservation represent a major obstacle to the expansion of renewable energy and afforestation in other countries and it is not envisaged in Ireland either. Our Minister intends that these issues will be addressed in part by updating planning policy guidelines on wind farms and afforestation with particular reference to nature conservation requirements. The Department is currently revising the planning guidelines and has invited public input. This process should permit us to refine policy guidance in regard to the co-existence of wind farming and bird life. We welcome views from all parties in regard to this. In the context of afforestation, the forest biodiversity guidelines are designed to integrate biodiversity considerations into the development and management of forestry proposals. In regard to particular areas, Department officials are available to meet with landowners and forestry and wind farm developers to discuss ways in which their objectives may be achieved without undue disruption to the species. In this context it should be noted that, for example, some young forestry plantations may provide good hunting territory for the birds and there may be mitigating factors also in regard to wind farms.
In regard to Deputy Collins's initial comments, we are arranging to meet that deputation of wind farm developers again to go through the particular site and discuss the considerations in regard to it.
The special protected area is not an inflexible barrier to development but it is something that has to be looked at in the context of development. We do this on a case-by-case basis rather than having blanket rules.
A number of members have indicated they wish to raise points. We will take their contributions and questions and follow with the replies.
I am deputising for Deputy Allen. It is an opportune time to discuss this subject. As Mr. Canny pointed out, a group of people came up from Kerry today who were discussing this issue. It is ironic that Kerry County Council was the first to produce a wind energy policy and it is a coincidence that the area we sought for preferential treatment is the very area out of which Dúchas is now proposing to make an SPA. This is leading to conflict. Both the executives and councillors agreed that the area is question is the preferred one for a wind energy development. People proceeded on those grounds and two applications have been made already. However, they are being held up because Kerry County Council officials are saying they will not make a decision on the applications until the hen harrier question is resolved.
This raises some questions. First, there is major competition even within the various companies associated with the generation of wind energy. There is huge expense involved in terms of preparatory work etc. If part or all of the area is designated as an SPA, will the issue of compensation arise for those who will be prevented from capitalising on the very attractive grants for wind energy projects? Mr. Craig mentioned compensation for farming. Many farmers regard wind farming as their only way of surviving.
The land in question is extensively forested from the Stacks Mountains to Cork. Members of the committee, no doubt, will refer to Cork. Surely one cannot equate compensation for planting with that for ordinary farm land. What is the position on this? It would be better to carry out consultation before the proposal is published. When it is published the onus will then be on the farmer to make changes rather than Dúchas, which will be defending it. Would it not be better to have consultations with the farmers, landowners and other interests beforehand, rather than placing them in circumstances in which they will be on the defensive? Will the delegates clarify that issue?
Can the publication be delayed to allow consultation take place? If people had not organised themselves and got alarmed when the hen harrier question was raised by Kerry County Council in the adjudication of a planning application, the delegates from Kerry would not be in Dublin today. Dúchas did not make the community aware of the issue but the community responded to the application, thus increasing its awareness. I understand two more applications are to be dealt with in Cork. That is not a good way of doing business and has meant the process of designation has begun on a bad note.
Co-operation has always existed between landowners and all State authorities. We should acknowledge that the landowners have shaped and protected our landscape and given it its distinctive look. That is why our landscape is so precious. In this instance, Dúchas is responding to an EU directive that was probably not too well considered because, until now, we did not examine EU directives properly but left it to civil servants. Politicians must take their share of the blame for this. Is Dúchas responding to anEU directive over the heads of thousands of people?
I am sure Dúchas was presented with approximately 67 questions on foot of a meeting in Temperglantine last week.
Dr. Alan Craig
We have them.
Okay. I will not allude to them any further. Will Mr. Craig state how many hen harriers must be present in an area and what other scientific evidence must exist before an area is designated an SPA?
Is there a certain acreage across the country that must be included in SPAs to satisfy the EU directive? Do the areas have to be specific areas, such as all coastal areas, or is it a matter of designating an overall percentage of land? At the moment, I think about 14% has been designated.
It is important that the Dúchas delegates respond to the issue of compensation and tell us the difference between compensating people for ordinary farm practices through REPS, for example, for forestry and for forfeiting the right to produce wind energy, which is far more lucrative.
I had the opportunity earlier today to meet the delegation from north Kerry at the request of my colleague, Deputy Moynihan-Cronin. I am familiar with the issue, which the committee will discuss in great detail. Although I know the area in question, I do not have as intimate a knowledge of its geography as Deputies Deenihan and Ferris. Am I correct in thinking the area is not formally proposed for SPA designation and that the process is only at a stage where the scientific studies are being undertaken? If or when it is proposed to be an SPA, the designation will be made by the Minister. Has he discretion as to whether designation should made at all? If it is made, what area will be covered? If it is not designated, which I understand to be the case at present, what will prevent either the authority for planning applications, whether for wind energy facilities or otherwise, or the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources from approving either wind energy development or forestry development? Is Dúchas actively objecting to such developments in advance of designation being made and the results of scientific studies being released? If this is the case, what is the basis of the objection?
Mr. Canny said Ireland was an important place for birds. While I do not disagree with him, I must also point out it is an important place for people. It is important that account is taken of the interests of landowners in rural areas.
I can immediately see a contradiction. Government policy strongly advocates the provision of wind farms and afforestation and encourages landowners to diversify. We are all aware that landowners' incomes have been greatly reduced and many are finding it difficult to make ends meet. While one Department advocates this policy it appears another Government agency is trying to impede progress in this field. While I appreciate that Dúchas has an important role in the protection of rare species of birds, I find it difficult to understand why it seeks to impede diversification. By their nature, the sites most suitable for diversification are also the most suitable habitat for hen harriers. I would like Mr. Canny to address this area.
Limerick County Council recently rejected an application for a wind farm development in the east of the county because it was situated in a known habitat of the hen harrier. I assume Dúchas made a submission to the council on this application. Will Dúchas confirm if this was the case?
I recently attended a public meeting which was attended by 700 or 800 concerned farmers. The question of compensation was raised with officials from Dúchas. I understand the only compensation available is a top up in REPS payments as Brussels has not agreed to other forms of compensation. The top up in REPS payments is minimal and would not justifiably compensate landowners. Some farmers have difficulty in selling their lands if it is designated as a special protection area. It is not clear whether there is a charge on the deeds of the lands that drastically reduces its resale value.
While I agree Dúchas has a job to do, this seems to be widespread and covers a large area of land that is required by farmers to supplement their incomes via diversification. The joint committee has agreed to listen to the arguments of the landowners in question. Will Dúchas ensure that this does not become a fait accompli before we meet with landowners, probably in the first week of April? At the meeting I attended, we were led to believe that much work had yet to be done on this job, for example, sites had to be decided on. We are also hearing reports that proposals could be brought to the Minister as early as the first week in April asking him to designate particular sites. Will Mr. Canny confirm this?
Mr. Canny
The compensation scheme for special areas of conservation and special protection areas for birds provides compensation for actual losses. This effectively means one does not receive compensation for potential losses. An application for a wind farm can be turned down for half a dozen different reasons and not just designation. If we tell a landowner that they must restrict their activities in some way they are entitled to compensation. For example, the number of sheep grazing on mountains in the west has been reduced. We have paid full compensation for this reduction for four years now. As regards turf cutting, we have paid £1,300 per acre where turf is not cut. While there are areas other than REPS where we have paid compensation, we have only made payments when we have stopped someone from doing something. This also applies to the forestry question. If someone does not plant trees, we do not pay them for not doing so.
The question of consultation before publication is somewhat like the conundrum of the chicken and the egg. It is difficult to consult before one has a good idea of what one wants to propose. We have made public our intention to look at these areas. This has caused concerns but we have not yet put the consultation machinery in place, as we would when we make formal proposals for designation. When we do that, we place advertisements and hold public meetings that give an opportunity to explain to people what is involved. I feel people are unnecessarily worried.
Publication has legal status. While there is a three month consultation period for cases, we have given a longer period on every case so far. Assessment and notification of proposals must be made before that period. This was designed to prevent people destroying the habitat before it was formally designated.
Is the onus on the farmer or landowner to challenge this?
Mr. Canny
We have, for example, conducted studies that found birds were using an area while others have denied this. It is easier to deal with bogs where one can walk the land and see whether something complies strictly or not. Decisions are made on a scientific basis and an appeals board is in place where people not satisfied with the view of Dúchas can lodge an appeal.
We are under pressure to implement the directive that dates from 1979 and was ratified by Ireland in 1985. We are behind in designations and we are under pressure from Europe to implement the directive. I will pass the question on the number of hen harriers that should be designated to Dr. Craig.
Dr. Craig
The Deputy asked how many hen harriers should be designated or whether it is a matter of designating a certain proportion of the country for their protection. It is very much the former rather than the latter - there is no formal requirement to designate particular proportions of the country. However, there is a requirement to protect a significant proportion of the total population of, for example, the hen harrier, which is listed on the annex to the birds directive, by designation. There are no hard and fast regulations in the directive about that. International understanding has developed that, when dealing with bird populations and selecting sites, the first short-listing includes sites that have 1% or more of the national population of a species. This is relatively easy to apply for birds that occur in large concentrations like the Greenland white-fronted geese, but it is more problematic when dealing with the species like the hen harrier which, partly by its nature as a bird of prey, is in fairly small numbers and widely dispersed. If one formally applies the 1% rule, any area where there are two breeding pairs of hen harriers would qualify for consideration. However, that is the first trawl, it means one does not really look beyond that. Another international guideline suggests that one should protect areas covering about two thirds to three quarters of the population. That is perhaps better guidance as to what might be involved in this instance. It is also the general framework within which we are looking at nine areas and assembling detailed information on the extent of the distribution of the species.
The particular concern today is focused on the Stacks Mountains end of a series of mountain ranges which we have identified as one of the nine areas of interest, extending from the Stacks Mountains through the Glannaruddery Mountains to the Mullaghereirk Mountains. Information suggest that between 33 and 40 breeding pairs live there, which is one third to one quarter of the total number of hen harriers in the country. That emphasises that this area is one of great importance. If we are designating SPAs for the hen harrier at all, we must designate at least some part of that area. Other places will fall into place but it must be regarded the best place in the country for the species.
Originally, documentation stated that 34 areas came under this directive, whereas Dr. Craig said that just nine areas were being investigated.
Dr. Craig
The 34 areas referred to by the Deputy may be a confusion with designations proposed for other species during 2002. The then Minister formally proposed 25 new special protection areas and nine extensions, mostly islands and in coastal sites, for various kinds of water birds and seabirds. Some nine areas are being actively looked at in relation to the hen harrier.
What are the consequences if the EU directive is not implemented, as has been the case in other countries?
Dr. Craig
The consequence of not implementing an EU directive in open defiance would be a case in the European Court of Justice with the near certainty, if one was openly defiant rather than actively defending one's position, of a conviction which would lead to the imposition of daily fines of the order of €20,000.
Was provision not made for socio-economic grounds to be taken into consideration? Many of these areas are thinly populated but of interest to the farming population there. Surely, socio-economic grounds would prevail if there were many disadvantaged areas, as is the case in these circumstances.
Dr. Craig
The habitats and birds directives both refer to social and economic considerations, but they come into play in considering developments and use of land. We are expected to identify the areas for protection on scientific grounds alone, as is international practice in implementing the directives. When it comes to assessing development that might impact on such an area, social and economic considerations can be taken into account. Preferably, one can examine alternative forms of development, but if there are none, it is possible for the Minister or the Government to take a decision to go ahead with some development for over-riding reasons of public interest.
A number of members have indicated they want to ask a question and we cannot go on all evening.
Mr. Canny
The area in question in County Kerry has not yet been formally proposed for designation. The process is that we, in the division of the Department, put a proposal to the Minister as to what should be designated. The Minister will then decide "Yes" or "No" and whatever he decides "Yes" on will be publicly proposed as a site, then the public consultation period and appeals process come into play. As Dr. Craig pointed out, the directive states that one must make the decision on scientific grounds in relation to designation of an area.
Another question asked what was preventing the local authority from giving planning permission. Local authorities have a general direction that they should take account of environmental considerations when making planning decisions. That general duty must be followed. It is up to them to make a decision as to whether they accept the arguments for or against a particular proposal.
It was also asked whether Dúchas was actively objecting to developments. We are objecting actively to some developments and not to others on a case by case basis. We try to evaluate it fairly. Even if an area is not designated, we look at whether a development would have adverse impacts on nature conservation generally or particular species. If we think it does, we will object and put it to the local authority for its decision. That is our general input into planning applications.
Deputy Cregan referred to a contradiction between forestry, wind-farms and birds. There can be conflict but not necessarily contradiction. Our problem is to try and balance it so we get some of each and there is a reasonable solution. I do not have details of the case in Limerick, but if the Deputy gives them to me afterwards, I can write to the Chairman or him. There is no charge on the lands for designation. There is a possibility, under the regulations, that a charge or burden can be registered at the Land Registry but we have never done so. We are not aware of any difficulty in selling land. After we started proposals for designation, some areas of land increased in price substantially, but there are differing views on that. There is no chance of our publishing the proposals before the beginning of April so, if the committee wishes, we can come before it again at that point.
I am still not clear on where the burden of scientific proof lies. Is it Dúchas's responsibility to produce scientific proof of the need to designate an area, or is it for the farmer to prove otherwise? Is there proof, scientific or otherwise, that wind farms are a danger to any species? As far as I have been made aware, hen harriers seem to be able to live side-by-side with a wind farm without any difficulty. Does Mr. Canny accept that the possibility of a landowner's potential livelihood being taken from them creates far greater difficulty for the survival of the hen harrier in that when they find themselves closed down by a directive they may have no option but to take matters into their own hands, which of course I am not advocating? In the process of consultation and in formulating a decision, this should be taken into account.
An area mapped out by Dúchas in my own constituency, taking in 83,640 acres, has been designated as the preferred position for wind farming and forestry. Quite a large portion of it is already under forest. It is also an area that has suffered quite a lot of economic and social deprivation. With the potential that is there, particularly regarding afforestation and wind farming, it offers the opportunity to the landowners and their families that reside there of at least having some type of life. The area we are talking about makes up almost one fifth of what is being considered, which is alarming for the people of that area and for the entire county. What difficulties are presented by afforestation to the survival of the hen harrier? Is there scientific evidence to suggest that it in some way inhibits its population? When can we expect the consultation process? Will it be weeks or months? How far down the road are we talking about?
To clarify the existing position, Dúchas has issued indicative maps and local authorities are at this point implementing the wishes of Dúchas with regard to those maps. Even at this point, planning permissions for wind farms are at least being delayed because they are awaiting permission from Dúchas, or the planning authorities are awaiting confirmation of aspects relating to the hen harrier. There has already been a cost to many landowners and developers. The same thing applies to forestry, with a hold-up in sanctions for afforestation at this time. The third area to be affected will be that of general farming. We must have no doubt that those who want to remain farmers within the indicative areas are extremely worried that their day-to-day farming will be affected. I find it very hard to believe that there will not be extra regulations imposed on farms in these areas affecting the well-being of farming.
That brings us to the area of compensation if this goes ahead. As has already been mentioned here with regard to Kerry, when we were completing our county development plan in Cork we identified, as part of that process, the areas that were most suitable for wind farms, in conjunction with another European programme. The areas identified as the most suitable for wind farms are nearly exactly the same as those in the designated maps. Compensation must be offered for this. As they are designated in the county development plan as potential areas for wind farms, and the only reason they are being refused is the imposition of the new SPA, it is obviously a matter for compensation as far as farms are concerned.
I find it very hard to understand why, when a burden is put on the deeds of a property, people do not expect that property to be devalued. If the use of any property is limited for the future, the property is naturally devalued. If SPAs are introduced for the hen harrier, we must consider the issue of compensation from three points of view, which will require a supplementary budget. Wind farmers will have to be compensated, those in forestry will have to be compensated and farmers will have to be compensated for under-utilisation of their land. The social problems mentioned by Senator Finucane are equally important: these are already areas of depopulation and marginal farming, in which people have worked extremely hard over the years to rear their families. In forestry and wind farms, these people saw an opportunity for making extra income so that they could remain on their farms and continue to rear their families in rural areas. Now this is all being called into question.
When will the indicative maps become real ones? My information, from questions I asked the Minister about what actual studies had been undertaken by Dúchas up to now, is vague: two bits of studies have been done, which are not complete at this time. There is no evidence, as has already been pointed out, that the hen harrier is affected by wind turbines. There is evidence that the rotation of forestry has enhanced the chances of the hen harriers surviving. The entire issue is questionable. This directive was introduced in 1985 but we still do not have any sound conclusion to scientific studies of the effects of forestry and wind farms on the hen harrier.
The Minister underestimates the compensation that will have to be paid. He said the SPA designation does not give rise to any entitlement or need for compensation. At meetings in my area, I have seen the concern of the community. People are mobilising to ensure their rights are protected. After negotiations local farm leaders will get involved. There should be more consultation before anything is done.
We need a specific answer from Dúchas about when it is going to publish its maps. It should not do it before it has published the results of scientific studies we can all then examine before the final designations.
The information we are getting from Dúchas as a national body about traditional farming methods disagrees with the information on the ground. People are saying that if these special protection areas are enacted, spraying rushes, ploughing fields, draining and dyking will be stopped and that farmers will have to get permission from Dúchas before restarting. We need the facts about this. Many people in traditional farming are worried by the answers they have been given. It was envisaged that there would be no interference with traditional farming methods but now those in a special protection area have to get permission from Dúchas to farm. Farming is not permitted to continue in a traditional way.
Unfortunately, afforestation and wind farming are two alternative enterprises on marginal land that seem to be in dire conflict with the special protection area of the hen harrier. There does not seem to be any scientific information that states that we cannot have wind turbines and the hen harrier in the same area. Local authorities are using indicative maps to stop the development of wind farms and afforestation. Before we go any further all of the information should be made available.
Dúchas intended to introduce the directive without the knowledge of the people and then tell farmers they were now in special protection areas. Dúchas would start negotiations then so that the onus was on the farmer to provide the scientific information. There is a small amount of money available to help a farmer or landowner to come up with this information but it will be difficult for him to do that against an expert body such as Dúchas when it has already made recommendations.
It is interesting to note that the hen harrier is nesting in areas of high density afforestation although we were told that afforestation from eight years onwards is bad for it. The hen harriers have left parts of the country where they were nesting for these areas on the borders of Counties Cork, Kerry and Limerick. That would seem to indicate that afforestation affords protection to the hen harriers rather than endangering them.
The people who invested in wind energy were seeing profit from mountainous land for the first time. Now, if Dúchas writes a report that the wind farm is detrimental to the hen harrier, that is the end of a landowner's dream of a decent income from this land. If areas are designated can people be properly compensated for their loss of income?
I would like clear guidance from Dúchas about what is allowed under traditional farming methods. There are all kinds of rumours circulating and Dúchas should publish concise guidelines. Is there any scientific proof that the hen harrier and the wind turbine cannot exist in one area? Why has the hen harrier survived in areas of dense afforestation?
Huge areas of County Kerry are covered by this map. Knocknagashel, Lyracrumpane, Scartaglin, the Derrynasaggart Mountains near Derryreag and Cloonkeen are ideally situated for wind turbines and wind farming. People are refused planning permission for wind turbines because of the hen harrier even though I have a document that states there are no known consequences for hen harriers from wind farms at this stage. Hen harriers hunt below the minimum height of turbine rotary blades and therefore the potential for impact is negligible.
Mr. Canny should clear the air. That would give the planners a new set up and they could view the areas I mentioned in a different light. If the public statement here by Mr. Canny is correct - I have no reason to believe it is not - and these birds move below the turbine rotary blades, then no harm is being done. There is no more chance of hen harriers crashing into the turbines than there is of me going to the moon.
They could get their wings clipped though.
We could bring in a turbine here so.
Mr. Canny
There were a lot of questions and I shall try to deal with them all. I was asked where the burden of scientific proof lies. The initial onus is on Dúchas to come out and say it believes that hen harriers or a particular habitat are to be found at a certain location, which we would do on the basis of surveys. We would make available to anybody those surveys detailing where the harrier is to be found. If somebody comes along then to dispute those findings, we would expect them to present some evidence to support their case. Thus, there is some burden of proof upon individuals or organisations with opposing views.
A few people have questioned whether wind farms are dangerous to hen harriers. A couple of years ago, we received a report that hen harriers were getting caught up in turbine blades. We have tried to find supportive evidence of that but have not succeeded. Thus, we do not believe this is happening. It happens very occasionally but is not a significant problem. Collisions are not a problem.
In what context is this?
Mr. Canny
I am referring to collisions with a wind turbine. Deputy Murphy referred to a short study done in one season of a pair of hen harriers which nested fairly close to a turbine. The hen would not go within 350 metres of the turbines, whereas the cock flew in and between them, so the study was not hugely conclusive.
Are there implications in that for planning permission?
Mr. Canny
There are planning permission implications when there is interference with the nest.
I cannot get my head around the exact problem that exists in relation to wind farms.
Mr. Canny
Dr. Craig will return to that issue. The issue of afforestation was also raised. We have pointed out that new forest plantations are good for the birds. When trees grow tall, however, and the canopy closes, there is very little prey for hen harriers, which is damaging to them. What is required is a mixture of open moorlands and new growth. This is the type of environment in which the birds have done well.
Regarding the beginning of the public consultations, we are assessing the evidence at the moment, looking at the surveys and trying to map relevant areas. We will then bring our findings to the Minister and leave it to him to decide the publication date.
I hope Mr. Canny sees this meeting as part of that consultation process.
Mr. Canny
Yes. We have issued indicative maps at this stage to local authorities to indicate where we wish them to assess applications and take into account the issue of hen harriers. We have not asked them to ban development in these areas. We would not ask local authorities to ban development in these areas even after they have been designated. We simply ask them to assess applications to see whether they will have implications for hen harriers.
The fears of farmers about the imposition of greater restrictions have been raised. Somebody mentioned earlier that almost 14% of the country, including water and sea areas, is within special areas of conservation. We have not imposed serious restrictions on farming practices. We have sat down with farming organisations and negotiated prescriptions as to how people should farm in those areas. Two primary examples relate to the feeding out of cattle in the Burren and the stocking density on the hills for sheep. There is no reason to worry about greater restrictions on farmers.
I would not accept that land is automatically devalued if it is designated. If the farmer is part of REPS, for example, he gets paid higher annual premia, so there are balancing factors.
What if the farmer is not in REPS?
Mr. Canny
He chooses not to be in REPS. It is a voluntary scheme. Wind farms can cohabit, but there must be careful planning in terms of how many there will be, where they will be located and how much impact they will have.
Dr. Craig
In relation to concerns about wind farms and forestry, I will deal with the forestry issue first, more or less reinforcing what Mr. Canny has said. Although we do not have direct, scientific evidence, it is reasonable at this stage to infer the relationship between forestry and hen harriers. Essentially, young plantations are good and mature plantations bad. We are not opposed to further afforestation, but we would be concerned for the hen harrier if there was a substantial overall increase in the proportion of those hill areas under mature forestry at any one time. This would likely lead to a further reduction in the hen harrier population. We must be careful to achieve a balance. We accept that young plantations are actually good news for the hen harrier.
In trying to interpret the long-term trend in hen harrier populations, it does seem, overall, that the increase in the extent of mature forestry over the past 30 years or so has been to the disadvantage of the hen harrier. We must be open about that. Unfortunately, we know very little in terms of the impact of wind farms, and there does not seem to be any substantial amount of guidance from other countries. I learned only this afternoon of research that has been conducted in Wales, so we will have to examine whether there is any new information available there. By and large, however, wind farms and hen harriers have not been found in the same locations up to now. Our concern is that there might be serious displacement of hen harriers from areas with wind turbines, but we need more information on this.
About two years ago, we advised Kerry County Council regarding a wind farm application to permit the application but to impose a condition about monitoring hen harrier activity before, during and after construction. I believe the applicant was happy to comply with the condition but, unfortunately, that wind farm has not proceeded. In at least two other cases I am aware of in recent months, we have taken the same view. We must have more information and, therefore, in those cases as well we are saying to proceed, give permission but condition the applicant to undertake monitoring so we can use this information to feed back into other areas. That is where we are at present.
I have another engagement. Is it agreed that the vice-chairman, Deputy Healy-Rae, take the Chair for the remainder of the meeting? Agreed.
DEPUTY HEALY-RAE took the Chair.
I am aware of a wind farm application in Doone, County Limerick, being turned down in my local authority area because of the hen harrier. The local authority turned down the application because there was a Dúchas submission on concerns about the hen harrier. Planning permissions are being refused because of these concerns even though there are unscientific grounds. It has been said that there are no scientific grounds. In fact, it has been said there was little evidence that the wind farm was interfering with the hen harrier. Perhaps the delegation would comment on that.
I am a member of another committee on the Constitution. The committee is looking at property rights. This issue arose and we questioned an eminent constitutional lawyer about it. What evidence is there that the designation of an area does not reduce the value of the land? We are informed by several sources that it and other designations have reduced the value of land. Farmers have told us that sales of lands have been compromised by areas being designated. With regard to the property rights under the Constitution, has the delegation received legal advice that if it interferes with the value of the property, compensation should be paid? The constitutional view is that if one reduces the capital value of the land, compensation should be paid.
I will take the next three speakers.
I attended that public meeting in the Devon Inn and I was astounded at the crowd that attended. A total of 800 people attended. I have never seen a farmers' meeting in County Limerick at which there was so much interest in an issue. I am not saying the 800 people were affected by this issue. Many were but many arrived in solidarity with other farmers. It is symptomatic of the malaise in farming. Incomes are down and many farmers in these areas were considering wind farms and forestry as sources of alternative income. Feeling under siege in other areas, they naturally wished to show solidarity with other farmers.
I wish to refer to the socio-economic grounds. The delegation mentioned earlier that it presents information to the Minister and that socio-economic factors are taken into consideration, such as the potential for development of wind farms and forestry. One would hope that common sense will prevail in the decisions that are made. With regard to this issue, does the Minister meet the other relevant Minister, Deputy Dermot Ahern? Deputy Ahern has issued, in the past week, a press release on wind energy. He is faced with the Kyoto Agreement and the deadline of 2007 for taking 2 million tonnes of fossil fuel out of the equation. The alternative energy source he suggests is large scale use of wind energy. If one removes the natural areas for wind energy generation from the equation, it is safe to predict that the Minister's targets will not be met in 2007.
There is a necessity for both Ministers to meet, consider the socio-economic grounds, the target for wind energy and the preservation of the hen harrier and to allow common sense to prevail in the ultimate decision. The point that was forcefully made at the meeting I mentioned was that given how farming is going, the people in those areas and not the hen harrier will be the endangered species. That point was made with great emotion by several speakers.
I concur with the previous speakers who attended the meeting in Templeglantine in west Limerick last Thursday. There is real concern. I cannot agree or disagree with Senator Finucane as to why the attendance was so large but they were there to show grave concern that they might be affected.
We, as Oireachtas Members, are not clear about this issue because we got different answers from Dúchas's representatives at the meeting in Templeglantine from the answers we have received at this meeting. The delegation said that £1,300 has been paid with regard to turf cutting. At Templeglantine we were told turf cutting is not an issue as long as the top sod was replaced. I have the note I took at the meeting with me. The representative said turf cutting is not an issue once the top sod is replaced. Questions were asked. One farmer asked if one could cut two or three extra loads to sell, as many farmers do to supplement their income. It is difficult to understand why the delegation gives one answer while its representative gave another.
Other issues were raised regarding traditional farming methods, such as cutting silage, spreading slurry and spraying rushes. It is difficult because people have different views on this. I am delighted, therefore, that this meeting has been arranged for 3 April. Perhaps Dúchas's representatives could be present in the gallery. Such an arrangement was used at the meeting of a different committee and it was successful. Dúchas can then hear, at first hand, the concerns of the people we represent and on whose behalf we speak today.
Dúchas is a statutory consultee and will make recommendations to the Minister before he makes the decision. However, the delegation also said Dúchas is under pressure to implement the directive but it did not say why. Mr. Craig said it was due to the large fines that would be imposed on the Government. Are any other countries in Europe implementing this scheme? Are we the first to do so? It was introduced in 1983 but now, 20 years later, people are still confused. I am concerned that I do not understand the scheme fully.
The compensation issue has been raised by nearly every speaker but we are still not clear about it. The delegation says the compensation scheme is for actual and not potential losses. If I have a farm of land that does not have SPAs, it is worth a certain amount. It is always available as an asset. If I go to the bank to raise money for a particular reason, the farm is the asset. However, because I have not developed it, according to the delegation, the asset is not there. I do not agree with that. It does not make sense. Believe it or not, it is public representatives who are getting the blame, not the members of Dúchas who will implement the directive. Perhaps much of this is our own fault because we gave Dúchas too much power. That is something the Government must examine. People have been really concerned and my phone has not stopped ringing since that meeting last Thursday night in the Devon Inn. I am not a member of this committee but am here to express to the Dúchas representatives the real concern that exists. Even the IFA said it submitted proposals to Dúchas - I do not have them here now but can forward them if the representatives do not have them already - but received no reply.
Much emphasis was laid on the planning permission problems that might arise. I have a Dúchas document which states consent must be sought from the Minister for Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht and the Islands - as the post was previously known - prior to carrying out certain activities within certain SACs and SPAs. These are known as "notable actions" and are specific for different habitats and species. Written permission, it continues, is required from the Minister in respect of any works that are liable to significantly alter, damage or interfere with a NHA. When the issue of planning was raised at the meeting last Thursday night at Templeglantine, one Dúchas representative made the point that Dúchas had not objected to any planning permissions. He implied, more or less, that Dúchas will not be objecting in the future to any planning applications. That is completely at variance with the information before me in Dúchas's own document. Perhaps the representatives could try to explain this to us. We are hearing different interpretations of similar issues, so the representatives can understand how the ordinary person down the country could be confused.
We should not rush into this. As one farmer said to me yesterday, nobody can tell him he cannot do tomorrow what he has been doing all his life. They should not, but unfortunately, it appears that Dúchas can. I understand that Dúchas, as a statutory body, has a job to do, but we must be very careful because this will be a far more serious issue than either Dúchas or politicians think. I have been back in west Limerick for a long time, and I have never seen as much concern about anything in the area as I saw in the Devon Inn in Templeglantine last Thursday night.
I assume one of the areas that Dúchas would object to would be Kilduff, outside Tralee.
Mr. Canny
I do not know.
It is my understanding that Dúchas has raised an objection there. Under the AAR, bids have to be in by 24 April, and Lee Strand, a co-operative creamery in Tralee, is one of the main interest groups involved. The fact that Dúchas has objected has set back the process by four months, thereby inhibiting Lee Strand from putting in a bid. That is a matter Dúchas can clear up in its own time.
I am looking at an ecology consulting report written by Steve Percival. It is an eight-year study of collision and disturbance in relation to hen harriers and the significant impact on the breeding of hen harriers within the study area. It was carried out in two different locations, one in Orkney and the other in Wales. The report is adamant that the hen harriers have continued to breed in these areas without any adverse effects and no impact upon hen harrier populations. I was also present last Thursday night at the meeting in Templeglantine, where there were 800 people present, at a conservative estimate. Given the answers we have received here, there is no scientific reason for inhibiting farmers, wind farm developers or people engaged in forestry from continuing to act as they have been. The only evidence offered by Mr. Craig was that the female hen harrier in one study was not observed flying through the wind turbines, while the cock was.
Dúchas argues against the development of mature afforestation. However, coming from a rural area myself and living quite close to the Kilduff area near Tralee and the Brandon mountains, I cannot see any problem here. Once afforestation is established in any area, maturation brings benefits. There will obviously be a continuation of this. I do not know what geographical distance the hen harrier travels or moves within, but the Dúchas representatives have no concrete argument to justify what is about to be attempted here by the organisation. Dúchas is doing an awful injustice to the communities in areas that may be at least partly designated. This will have adverse effects on people living in such areas. It is not a personal criticism of the two witnesses before us, but the arguments they have made do not hold up. That is simply my conclusion from listening to both sides of the debate.
Acting Chairman: As this issue will be dealt with again by the committee, I will take brief questions from Deputies Deenihan and Moynihan.
The nesting period for hen harriers is presumably about three months. Could a solution be found whereby the turbines do not operate within this period and people could be compensated? That is just one possibility.
From a County Kerry perspective, my second question is very important. On 24 April 2002, the county secretary was issued with a preliminary notice to examine sites for consideration as special protection areas. Do the Dúchas representatives think that Kerry County Council is taking an extreme interpretation of that notice in delaying a decision on a very important application that is in hand at the moment? Finally, I ask Mr. Canny whether he could delay his decision at least until December before proceeding with the publication of the proposed designated areas? That is very important as this will be a major issue. Public disquiet is only starting to emerge now and there will be a lot more. When the farming organisations get their teeth into this, we will see even more mass meetings and protests than heretofore. This is only the initial stage. My advice is to allow a long period of consultation before publication.
Much has been said about the nesting birds alongside the turbine, the study which was done and the female hen harrier not going within 250 metres of the turbine. They nested there and were able to co-habit quite easily. The hen harrier did not go near the turbine but was able to survive alongside it. Is that correct?
This might be an unfair question but following what Deputy Deenihan said, when does Mr. Canny expect Dúchas to bring firm proposals to the Minister? It might be difficult to answer that question but will it be in two or three months? Most people are interpreting this in the same way as me, namely, that there is no evidence to suggest that turbines cannot be located on the hen harrier habitat. It appears there is no evidence to suggest there is a conflict between wind turbines and the hen harrier.
No scientific evidence.
I refer to what Deputy Ferris said about afforestation. It has been said the harrier requires young forestry as part of its natural habitat. When that forestry matures, it will be cut down and there will be more young forestry. Could one not argue that the whole process is of benefit to the hen harrier?
I know from where Deputy Deenihan is coming in terms of suspending the windmills from January to March but I am not sure about the economics of that suggestion. If there is concern during the breeding period from January to March, construction of a wind energy plant should not take place during that period.
When can we expect SPAs for other species, birds or fish?
Will the grouse be the next species?
Mr. Canny
I am not sure I have enough time to answer all the questions specifically. If I do, I will address them in order. Deputy Neville asked about Doone. I will have to check that. I will write to the Chairman giving him any comments made by Dúchas on that site.
The planner's report stated that given the rarity of the hen harrier, it was considered that even the remote possibility of this development having a negative effect on the hen harrier must take precedence over the benefits of wind energy.
Mr. Canny
Is that a quote from Dúchas or from a planner in Limerick County Council?
That is from the report from a planner. The council also pointed out that Dúchas would probably designate Knockastanna Hill a special protection area for hen harriers in the coming months while Bird Watch Ireland also expressed its concern over the adverse affect the wind farm would have on the breeding cycle of hen harriers in the area.
Mr. Canny
I will get a copy of what we sent to Limerick County Council on that issue. My belief is that we did not object but I am not sure, so I do not want to make a statement to that effect. I would like to come back to the committee on it.
Dúchas's submission was the reason it refused planning permission.
Mr. Canny
Before people rush to judgment on that, I will submit the evidence which I do not have here.
Quite apart from the hen harrier, is there a legal obligation on the county council to take into account what national bodies are considering?
Mr. Canny
They must take——
A careful official will say "no" to be on the safe side.
Mr. Canny
I cannot answer for careful officials. Unfortunately, I have not always been as careful as I should have been. I will answer for anything Dúchas does and seek to defend or admit it was wrong, if that is what I believe.
In regard to property rights and evidence of reduction in value, we have evidence of increases in value after the designation of lands in the Burren. There have been no claims of which I am aware from farmers for compensation for the reduction in the value of their land. The agreement we made with the farming organisations - this has been published - is that we would compensate for reduction in land values consequent to designation. We have had no claims in that regard. We do not think there is a constitutional problem because we are prepared to compensate. I have no evidence in that regard.
Socio-economic grounds do not come into the designation of the site. The site is designated solely on scientific grounds - in this case, whether the birds are there and whether they use it. It comes into play in the assessment of a development.
In regard to afforestation, wind energy and Kyoto, my Minister is responsible for climate change. We are very conscious of trying to support wind energy where possible. We approach wind energy developments from the point of view that they are okay unless they are damaging. We approach it from a positive angle.
A number of members spoke about the evidence of wind farming being negative. As I tried to say in my opening statement - I do not know whether it was clear - we are looking for peaceful co-existence between forestry, wind farms and hen harriers. We are not looking for a 100% solution for any of them. We must, if you like, mind our corner to ensure the hen harrier is not wiped out. For the first ten to 15 years, afforestation can be good for the hen harrier but, as most members will know, it takes another 20 years before it is cut, so that period is negative. We need a well managed system whereby tall trees are replaced with younger ones. That is not easy to plan. Essentially, we are trying not to be negative and to balance our nature conservation objectives with other objectives.
I accept the comments made about the concerns. I have been to some meetings, although, fortunately, none too recent.
In fairness, Mr. Wilson, one of the speakers representing Dúchas, was quite good but he emphasised he was a scientist and was unable to answer the questions about which people were concerned.
Mr. Canny
Perhaps we need to send two people to some of those meetings. One of the problems that we have at those meetings is that so many different interests are represented. In a specially protected area for birds, we generally do not have a problem about turf cutting. It is usually not an issue for birds. I suspect some people may have been talking about a raised bog in north Kerry.
A question was asked about turf cutting and it was stated it was not an issue. It was that simple and there was no further discussion.
I can show Mr. Canny my notes.
Mr. Canny
Turf cutting in raised bogs is an issue for us but it is generally not an issue in a bird site.
Is it not an issue?
Mr. Canny
No, turf cutting is not an issue.
A farmer in the west was paid €1,300——
Mr. Canny
That was in the midlands. His land was on a raised bog, which was a special area of conservation and we paid compensation to him to stop cutting turf. Turf cutting is not an issue——
This issue should be cleared up by Dúchas. It is important for people to attend these meetings.
Mr. Canny
We try to attend the meetings with various levels of success in getting our point across. The question of fines by the European Commission was mentioned. It is a consideration and it is important that we are not fined €20,000 a day. We signed up to the birds directive in 1985 and we have an obligation, as a member state, to implement it. It is a national objective to do that.
Is Ireland the first country to implement the directive?
Mr. Canny
No, but we are one of the few countries about which there is a reasoned opinion from the European Court saying we have insufficient designations to date. We are on the road to the possibility of fines. We were behind in our designations but we have done a lot of them over the past five or six years.
Was that because of a shortage of inspectors?
Mr. Canny
Probably.
Could more coastal areas, where there is more bird life, be designated to reach the target?
Mr. Canny
That is where the new sites are found. I have a book to give all the committee members outlining the 110 sites we have designated so far. We have had discussions with the IFA and the ICMSA about a review of compensation and the procedures. The Stephen Percival study was mentioned at our earlier meeting and we are getting a copy of it. Our scientists may have it but I am not sure. We will look at it again.
There was a question of turning turbines off during breeding. We will not go down that road. Let it be built and get on with it or do not allow it to be built if it is felt to be seriously damaging. It is a possibility but it is quite marginal. There is room for a certain number but I do not know what is the number. There is room for balance between turbines, forestry and harriers.
Is the breeding period between March and August?
Dr. Craig
It is something like that. It is certainly not January to March, which was mentioned earlier. It is in spring and early summer.
Mr. Canny
There was a question about a delay until December. We will produce our documents, put them to the Minister and——
Blame the Minister.
Mr. Canny
We will take any blame due to us but the Minister is the deciding body.
We will get the blame, not Mr. Canny.
I presume Kerry County Council is using the preliminary notice it received from Mr. Canny to delay the planning decision at Kilduff by Lee Stand.
Mr. Canny
I am not sure of the full details of the reference but we would have asked the council to look at the implications for hen harriers because there are harriers there and there is a possibility it could be designated in the future. We are not asking the council to delay.
Then it should go ahead and make a decision.
Mr. Canny
The message I would like to get out is that we have to designate sites for the birds but that does not mean there will not be development. We are prepared to look at how we can balance the three conflicts in this case with the developers and farmers in the area.
What about compensation, which is the key factor?
Mr. Canny
There is a problem with compensation. How do we compensate for potential? We had this argument when we started in 1997. I used to say then that if a person told me he was going to build a ten storey hotel, I would not compensate him for not doing it. A person might be refused permission for a wind farm for scenic or road reasons. Compensation for potential is not realistic.
I thank Mr. Canny and Dr. Craig for appearing before the committee and answering our many questions. This meeting has been very useful and informative. I remind Deputies that a meeting of the Select Committee on the Environment and Local Government will take place on Wednesday 19 March at 2.30 p.m.
The joint committee adjourned at 4.55 p.m. sine die.