I thank the committee for the opportunity to outline the financial, bureaucratic and day-to-day farming challenges which the nitrates regulations have placed on farmers. I introduce my colleagues, Mr. Pat Smith, IFA general secretary, Mr. Pat Farrell, IFA national environmental committee chairman, Mr. Colm McDonnell, IFA national grain commission chairman, Mr. Tim Culinane, IFA national pigs committee chairman, and Mr. Thomas Ryan, environment executive secretary.
The agrifood sector is the largest Irish-owned productive sector, accounting for almost 50% of exports from Irish-owned manufacturing. The sector employs more than 270,000 people, representing one in seven jobs in the country. The gross value added of agriculture and the agrifood sector is €12 billion annually. The IFA estimates that the sector has the ability to deliver an additional €2 billion in exports and 16,000 jobs.
Excessive regulation is impeding the sustainable expansion and further job creation of the industry. The duplication of inspection on the same farm by numerous regulatory authorities is a wanton waste of taxpayers' money and is inexcusable in the current economic climate. This excessive regulation does not benefit the environment but places significant farm management challenges and stress on farm families.
Farmers have shown by their actions that they are committed to protecting the environment and farming in a sustainable manner. This can be seen by the fact that farmers have spent more than €2 billion upgrading and developing farmyards to comply with the requirements of the nitrates regulations. In 2009, farmers will recycle more than 19,000 tonnes of farm plastic, some 92% of lakes are classified as unpolluted, and some 65,300 farmers participate in the rural environment protection scheme, REPS. The substantial investment in storage facilities and farmyard improvements has increased total farm borrowings to more than €5.5 billion, a 67% increase in the past five years. Farm families' incomes have dropped dramatically by 40% in two years and farmers are now struggling to repay these very substantial debts.
The recent closure of the REP scheme has been a major blow to farmers, who often forgo output, yield and earning potential from the land to farm more extensively. It is vital the REP scheme is reopened to the thousands of farmers who show an environmental commitment over and above the norm and have suffered significant income loss because of the ending of the scheme.
The agriculture sector is delivering its requirements under the nitrates regulations and the parent directive, the water framework directive, ahead of many other sectors. For example the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, continues to issue licences to local authorities to operate waste water treatment plants despite the fact that they fail to meet the requirements of the urban waste water treatment directive. Since the introduction of the nitrates regulations in Ireland in 2006, every farmer has had to meet all the requirements of the regulations or face prosecution. However, a more lenient approach seems to be shown to county councils. These same county councils have been identified by the EPA as the most likely cause of the majority of serious and moderate incidence of pollution in Ireland's rivers.
The IFA will outline in greater detail the issues to be addressed and will provide some workable proposals. Ireland's livestock and dairy industry is typically a grass-based production system. In the case of dairying, the grazing season length is approximately 250 days. The most economically efficient means of operating is to turn stock out on grass as early as possible. A survey conducted by Teagasc of 600 dairy farmers supplying milk to Connacht Gold, Glanbia and Kerry, found that the biggest limiting factor to early spring turnout was not grass availability, but soil conditions. This fact comes as no surprise because in recent years rainfall levels during the open period when slurry is permitted to be spread continue to rise.
Members of the joint committee can see the tables. In contrast to this, as can be seen from the table below, rainfall levels during the closed period, when slurry is not permitted to be spread continue to fall.
Weather patterns change on an annual basis. A snapshot of farming on the impermeable gley soils of the Teagasc research farm in Kilmaley, County Clare — which is typical soil type found in Clare, north Kerry, Mayo, Sligo and parts of Donegal — shows that low rainfall levels in May and June 2008 allowed almost full grazing days. Deteriorating weather conditions thereafter led to a significant reduction in evening grazing. However, in 2009, a different pattern is emerging where, because of favourable weather conditions and grass growth during the autumn months, the number of grazing days has increased in the month of October by 44% compared with 2008.
However, because the nitrates regulations require slurry to be spread by 15 October, slurry was spread and good growing grass was spoiled. This grass is an essential and cost-effective fodder. This is a ludicrous situation. The nitrates regulations ignore grass growth rates and the fact that farmers have experienced three unusually wet summers and are facing into severe winter fodder shortages. This grass cannot be grazed again for a further four to six weeks.
Failure to extend the slurry spreading date until the end of October to give farmers the chance to graze off paddocks, represents an economic loss of approximately €35 million to Irish dairy farmers. In autumn, every day extra at grass is worth about €2.10 per cow per day, or €2.3 million a day to the sector.
Slurry is a valuable resource which farmers should be allowed to use and manage based on best environmental and agronomic conditions. The decision not to extend the date when slurry can be spread beyond the deadline in the regulations must be reversed immediately. The cost burden now imposed on farmers who have to house stock because the nitrates regulations have forced them to spread slurry on lush grazing ground is excessive and unworkable, particularly at a time of such significant commodity price pressure.
From an environmental perspective it is illogical to insist that farmers should spread slurry during an open period, when rainfall continues to increase, and not to spread slurry during the closed period, when rainfall has declined and soil and air temperatures are favourable.
The Government has recognised flaws in the regulation by extending the date when slurry could be spread in 2008, while extending the date when fertiliser could be spread this year. These changes acknowledge the fact that desk-based regulations, which ignore good farming practice, are simply unworkable and environmentally unsound.
The regulation is clear that fertilisers cannot be spread when land is waterlogged, flooded or likely to flood, frozen or snow-covered, or heavy rain is forecast within 48 hours. The IFA proposes a move away from this strict closed period definition and replacing it with a sensitive period whereby, based on the best information available from Met Eireann and Teagasc, farmers are permitted to spread during this sensitive period, once the conditions when fertilisers cannot be spread are adhered to and soil and ground conditions are appropriate. The role of Teagasc, as the advisory authority, is essential to provide direction and guidance to farmers in this area.
I will now discuss the duplication of inspections, which is wasteful of taxpayers' money. When the revised nitrates regulations, S.I. 101 of 2009, were introduced earlier this year, the association highlighted the fact that the instrument would lead to the wasteful duplication of inspections by county council and departmental officials. This duplication is in breach of an agreement between the IFA and the then Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Dick Roche. The agreement is that the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food will carry out the inspections. On 22 April the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food issued a statement on the matter in which he confirmed, "Department of Agriculture Inspectors will Undertake Nitrates Regulations Inspections."
In addition, most of the county councils have passed motions calling for an end to this wasteful duplication. Regrettably, to date the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government has failed to write to county councils confirming the role of the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. Failure to do this has led to confusion. Can we afford these inefficiencies in the delivery of public services at a time when the Government deficit this year is projected to be €21 billion or 13% of GDP? Ireland cannot afford this inefficiency in the delivery of public services. Farmers will not accept this excessive level of bureaucratic gazing. The IFA calls on the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government to issue a circular to all local authorities immediately clarifying that the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food will undertake all nitrate regulatory inspections.
The nitrates regulations designate a range of buffer zones upon which manures cannot be spread. This has resulted in significant production loss and asset devaluation for the farmers affected. One example is where a county council exceeded the requirements of the nitrates regulations and imposed a 300 m buffer zone on a farmer's land, affecting almost 11 acres. The combined production loss and asset devaluation in this case amount to almost €70,000. To date the Departments of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government and Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and the county council have failed to recognise the impact of their decisions on farmers. The IFA proposes that buffer zones be decided based on best scientific and environmental evidence and that a process of engagement commence immediately with landowners and the IFA to agree a package to compensate farmers for the losses incurred. This issue must be addressed as a matter of urgency.
The Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government is proposing to introduce a groundwater regulation that will include a threshold value for nitrates in water of 37.5 mg/l. This ignores the fact that the nitrates regulations and the EU groundwater directive state the nitrates standard is 50 mg/l. In addition, this proposal ignores the lag time between the introduction of measures in the nitrates regulations and the delivery of outcomes. Research produced by Teagasc has shown a response time of 20 years between the adoption of measures to reduce nitrates and phosphorous loss and improvement in water quality. The nitrates regulations were introduced three years ago and must be given an opportunity to work. It is excessive, premature and unjustified to introduce more stringent threshold values on a farming community which is both economically and environmentally adjusting to the nitrates regulations. The IFA proposes that the threshold values in the groundwater regulations be set at the EU standard of 50 mg/l.
The nitrates regulations reduce the competitiveness of Irish cereal production. I acknowledge and welcome the move by the Minister to bring forward by more than six weeks the ploughing date for spring cereal crops. The green cover requirement-ban on winter ploughing for spring crops under the nitrates directive was eroding Irish grain growers' competitiveness by up to €60 per hectare. It threatened the future viability of grain production, given that Irish grain prices trade at world price levels. Approximately 300,000 hectares of cereals, oilseeds and proteins are grown in Ireland each year. In more than two thirds of the area spring crops are sown. Historically, Irish grain farmers have consistently achieved the highest grain yields across the world. This yield advantage has enabled growers to compete even in the most difficult seasons.
The competitiveness of Irish cereal production has been reduced since the introduction of the nitrates directive. Cultivation and associated mechanisation costs have increased, while restrictions on nutrient use are negatively impacting on crop yields. The IFA proposes that the regulations be reviewed with a view to restoring the competitiveness of our sector.
The unusually wet weather during the past three summers has resulted in widespread varying degrees of compaction. While moving forward the ploughing date is positive, the restrictive nature of the regulations impedes normal work flows and prevents farmers from taking remedial action in the autumn to restore soil structure where compaction has occurred.
The IFA proposes that the regulations be revised to allow for remedial action, such as sub-soiling and-or early ploughing of compacted soils, to be undertaken where needed. Natural weathering of ploughed soils reverses damage due to compaction.
Europe is increasingly moving towards integrated pest control management, which relies heavily on cultural control measures, yet the Irish nitrates regulations promote the abandonment of such practices, for example, breaking the green bridge — green cover. The green cover requirement encourages the proliferation of volunteer cereals, resulting in a high carryover of disease innoculum into the succeeding crop. This not only creates unnecessary disease pressure but also increases the risk of mycotoxins developing in harvested grain. DG Sanco, the Food Safety Authority of Ireland, the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and Teagasc, among others, are advocating the adoption of practices that would reduce the risk of mycotoxins.
The IFA proposes that the regulations are amended to allow for the use of cultural control measures such as the timely destruction of carryover volunteer cereals or green cover.
The current nitrogen recommendations applicable under Irish nitrates regulations, based on standard yields, will lead to the rapid depletion of organic soil nitrogen and result in reduced yields as time progresses, particularly in a continuous cereal situation.
In the United Kingdom, for instance, growers can apply 220 kg of organic N based on a standard yield of 8 tonnes per hectare, which is approximately 27.5 kg of nitrogen per tonne of grain. However, Irish growers are limited to 190 kg of nitrogen per hectare based on a higher standard yield of 9 tonnes per hectare, which is 21.1 kg per tonne of grain produced.
The comparison for spring cereals is even starker in that UK farmers can apply 150 kg per hectare based on a standard yield of 5.5 tonnes per hectare, which is approximately 27.3 kg of nitrogen per tonne of grain. The Irish figure is 135 kg based on a higher standard yield of 7.5 tonnes per hectare, which is 18 kg of nitrogen per tonne of grain produced.
IFA proposes that the current nitrogen application rates be raised to match total crop requirements, as current rates result in depletion of organic N, reduced crop yields and competitiveness.
On the nitrate vulnerable zones in the UK compared to Ireland, the UK recently revised legislation and implemented rules commencing on 1 January 2009 applying to nitrate vulnerable zones. There are major differences between the Irish and UK rules.
First, no green cover is required over the winter. Second, there is no closed period for ploughing. The UK Environment Agency actively promotes winter ploughing and sub-soiling, particularly where compaction is a problem, to minimise nutrient loss and soil erosion. Third, nitrogen recommendations for the main crops are considerably higher under the UK legislation at lower yield levels. Members should refer to Table 1. Fourth, the UK system is more flexible as it takes account of practical situations, for example, incorporation of straw initially leads to higher N requirement in the first two years. Ireland does not recognise this increased need and that will slow down the move to min till. Fifth, nitrogen availability from organic manures is calculated at higher levels than in the UK. That discourages and restricts the use of organic manures on tillage land in Ireland and reduces their attractiveness. Sixth, where organic manures are applied in consecutive years, the N index for that tillage crop moves from Index 1 to Index 2. That does not apply in the UK.
On the pig and poultry sectors, several anomalies in the regulations have already been brought to the attention of the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food through the intensive livestock working group set up in October 2006. However, I wish to highlight a number of concerns to the sector. The transitional arrangements have been of benefit to pig and poultry farmers since the nitrates regulations were amended to include them in 2006. These amendments arose because it was accepted that unless some provision was made, pig and poultry farming would be decimated and a valuable source of fertiliser would be lost. In the current regulation, a customer farmer is not entitled to avail of transitional arrangements for phosphorus if any chemical phosphorus is applied to his land. This is unnecessarily restrictive.
It is vital the transitional arrangements for organic manure are extended beyond the December 2010 deadline considering the number of jobs that are dependent on the industry, the economic pressure that has been put on the sector in the past three years and the value of pig manure as an organic manure.
Maximum fertilisation rates for nitrogen and phosphorus are the limits above which farmers are not allowed spread organic fertilisers. The Department should not seek to replace this system as proposed in the farmers' handbook.
No amendment has been made on the issue of soil nitrogen indexing. The use of the word "dressings" lacks clarity in the amount used. The build of organic nitrogen from liquid manure versus farmyard manure or solid manure from residual nitrogen loading is not justified. Research work is being carried out on that in Oak Park. The number of years that should elapse before the land is rated under index 2 when liquid pig manure is applied should be extended beyond the current two-year period. The method of calculating the contribution of phosphorus from stored livestock manure must also be amended to eliminate the disadvantage the present method creates for farmers in zones B and C.
The nitrates regulations have had a profound impact on the way farmers manage their holdings. The regulations have put extreme financial burdens on farmers, who have spent in excess of €2 billion in complying with the nitrates regulations.
The recent closure of the REP scheme has been a major blow to farmers, who often forgo output, yield and earning potential from the land to farm more extensively. It is vitally important that REPS is re-opened to the thousands of farmers who show an environmental commitment over and above the norm.
The nitrates regulations are flawed in that they remove the ability of the farmer to manage the farm based on best environmental and farming conditions. Instead, a farmer must adhere to illogical calendar farming requirements, have lands sterilised and have the threat of a duplication of inspections imposed. In addition, the pig and poultry sector have significant concerns, in particular with the extension of the phosphorus transitional arrangements.
I seek the committee's support to make this legislation more workable for Irish farming and to end the excessive costs, duplication and bureaucratic burden associated with this regulation.
