Skip to main content
Normal View

Commonage Division

Dáil Éireann Debate, Wednesday - 12 November 2014

Wednesday, 12 November 2014

Questions (7)

Seán Kyne

Question:

7. Deputy Seán Kyne asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine his views regarding the reduction in forage areas on commonages due to perceived under-grazing; his views that this reduction in forage areas could lead to farmers being able to put less stock on commonages leading to more scrubbing up of these areas and resultant loss of habitat status for special areas of conservation and SPA sites leading to possible breaches of the birds and habitats directive; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [42998/14]

View answer

Oral answers (6 contributions)

The question relates to the issues of under-grazing or perceived under-grazing on commonages and the impact that could have on the birds and habitats directive as the forage areas on these commonages are being reduced.

I thank the Deputy for this question. I know there are many commonage farmers in his constituency so he knows a lot about this issue. The farming of commonages lands has a long tradition in Ireland and, by its very nature, is a complex area. There are issues about the legal right to claim and there have always been disputes about the grazing of the commonages. In the vast majority of cases, however, commonage shareholders work well together on a co-operative basis. It is important to note that the optimum management of commonages will not be achieved unless the farmers are actually involved in the decision marking regarding the management of these lands as their knowledge of commonage areas is better than that of anybody else.

As the implementation of the new Common Agricultural Policy has progressed, my Department has been addressing a number of issues relating to commonage land in the context of both the new rural development plan, GLAS and the new basic payment scheme. The experience to date since the single payment scheme was introduced in 2005 is that there is a growing problem of commonage land being under-grazed and in some cases being abandoned by farmers. A variety of reasons have led to a problem with under-grazing, including the introduction of decoupled payments under the SPS in 2005, the requirement to de-stock in certain areas for environmental reasons and the age profile of farmers with commonage land.

This trend is not good for the environment, as these areas lose the specific characteristics as natural habitats for flora and fauna. In addition, the creeping ineligibility of these lands under the single payment scheme and other direct payment schemes poses a significant risk to the State in view of the risk of financial corrections being imposed by the European Commission.

Under the reformed CAP regime, it was decided that direct payments should be more focused on active farmers. In that regard, it will be necessary for all farmers who apply for aid under the basic payment scheme to have an agricultural activity on each land parcel on which they claim aid. In the case of marginal land including commonages, this agricultural activity can only be achieved by grazing the land. The minimum activity envisaged under the basis payment scheme is a modest one which is equivalent to a minimum of one ewe per 1.5 hectares grazing requirement.

I am not sure if Deputy Kyne was present when we mentioned we were looking at how we could apply flexibility where appropriate.

Additional information not given on the floor of the House

Currently discussions are taking place with the Commission regarding the setting of a relatively modest requirement under the Pillar 1 schemes and the areas of natural constraints scheme for maintaining marginal land including commonages.

My Department is in the process of securing agreement from the European Commission for Ireland’s new rural development plan. The next step is for the draft RDP to be agreed formally with the European Commission as soon as possible. Payments under GLAS, the new agri-environment scheme, can only be made in respect of actions going beyond the baseline requirements under the basic payment scheme under Pillar 1 of the CAP. To secure funding for hill farmers under GLAS, the challenge is to design a scheme which manifestly goes beyond the baseline. The key characteristic of commonage land is that it is farmed in common and the actions undertaken under GLAS will have to reflect that.

On this point, we clearly need to have sufficient people working together to achieve the best results for these commonages, in the interests both of the farming community and of the environment. I have explained how this will work in practice with the participation of a minimum of 50% of active farmers on commonages.

While there are considerable challenges to be overcome to meet both the active farmer requirements under the basic payment scheme and the implementation of grazing plans on commonages under GLAS, it is only in this way that the problems arising from undergrazing of commonages and resultant spread of scrub can be addressed effectively. It is clear that unless decisive action is taken, the level of ineligible areas will continue to expand.

I thank the Minister for the reply. I appreciate that the issue of commonages is somewhat of a minefield and very complex. I acknowledge the threat of fines against the State and that the Government has appealed those. Hopefully there will be a positive result from the Commission.

Although I am not a member of the committee, I raised this issue with departmental officials at the Joint Committee on Agriculture, Food and Marine last week. It relates to the consequence of reducing forage areas. Two of the commonages I have been dealing with are not in my constituency but in the neighbouring constituency in south Galway. In simple terms, if following inspection the Department of Agriculture, Food and Marine inspectors reduce the forage area in the farm, it means they are stating that the commonage is able to hold less stock. Therefore less stock will graze, thus exacerbating the problem of undergrazing. This could lead to more scrub and more areas not being grazed under commonages which could have implications down the line under the birds and habitats directives because these areas are supposed to be kept in proper habitat status.

That is a very fair point. We are trying to introduce a basic minimum stocking rate that everybody has to apply. However, in many commonage areas we want to encourage farmers to put considerably more stock on it. The stocking rate is about proving a minimum level of agricultural activity. I hope everybody agrees that we should focus our financial supports on active farmers as opposed to people who are lucky enough to inherit some land, a shareholding in a commonage or whatever. We are trying to link proof of active farming with a very low stocking rate. However, after that, whether through GLAS plans or other discussions with commonage farmers, we should be encouraging an appropriate stocking rate on that commonage area based on what it can carry. In most cases that will go way beyond the minimum stocking rate because otherwise we will continue to have undergrazing, more land being ungrazeable and therefore in effect the size of commonages shrinking because large parts will no longer be in an agricultural condition.

The Minister has time between now and when the single payment forms come out in the spring to look at this area. Where there are commonages and where the forage area is reduced, by definition they are able to hold less stock. If they are able to hold less stock, it will cause even more undergrazing and a reduction in the habitat status of the commonage. It is an important issue. Ideally the Minister should retain the forage areas but ensure the commonage is grazed and put a plan in place to graze these commonages. Will the Minister look at this area between now and when the forms come out in spring to investigate the possibility of doing this and the consequences for the State of not doing this? There are very competent people on the environment side of things within the National Parks and Wildlife Service and elsewhere who would understand the potential consequences for the State.

While I understand what the Deputy is saying, there is another consideration - the accuracy of mapping. On many occasions we have discussed in the House the problems we have had with the new LPIS whereby we now have more accurate imagery of land than we have ever had before. As a result of that accuracy, the Commission has deemed that Ireland effectively owes it €181 million in terms of money that has been spent on land that is not eligible. We do not accept that figure and we have gone to arbitration. We hope to reduce it significantly and we have put much work into that.

It shows the seriousness the Commission attaches to payments on lands it deems to be ineligible on the basis of what can be seen on a map's imagery. We cannot simply say that none of these commonage areas have shrunk in size because there has been an encroachment of vegetation because of a lack of grazing. If it can be seen that land is no longer fit for agriculture practice, then there are issues that need to be addressed in terms of eligibility to ensure accuracy and avoid future fines. At the same time a farmer should do as much as possible from the point of view of stocking rate.

Top
Share