Dáil Éireann Debate, Wednesday - 21 April 2021
2487. Deputy Paul Kehoe asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine the reason his Department imposed a 15 km buffer zone on all forestry projects without having the necessary resources in place to process screened in files, which has resulted in a backlog in the ecology section of his Department; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19058/21]
View answerThe Habitats Directive and the transposing legislation SI 477 of 2011 require, inter alia, that an appropriate assessment is undertaken where screening identifies a likelihood of the project having a significant effect on a European site(s). This is true regardless of the separation distance between the project and the European site(s).
A likely zone of impact is used in order to identify those European Sites to be specifically addressed during screening. In making a decision regarding the likelihood of a project having a significant effect on a European Site(s), all European Sites within a certain radius (or ‘likely zone of impact’) should be considered at screening stage, in addition to hydrologically-connected European Sites.
For example, in relation to a Special Protection Area (SPA), it is important to consider whether the project area lies within the foraging distance of bird species for which that SPA was designated, and many of these foraging distances exceed 3km. This was one of the reasons why 3km was not deemed appropriate. Prior to the change in mid-2019, the Department was advised by environmental consultants engaged to advise on the matter that our appropriate assessment screening decisions would be vulnerable to challenge if we continued to consider at screening stage only those European Sites within 3km.
Results on individual cases heard by the Forestry Appeals Committee also indicate that the 3km radius was not appropriate. The Department was advised that a radius of 15km, which had its origins in guidance provided by the National Parks & Wildlife Service, was the standard practice for other land-use sectors and that this distance would be more robust. This coupled with feedback from the FAC prompted the change from 3km to 15km.
The Department must at all times comply with the law, and it would be inappropriate to delay compliance with the law. However, the more important change that led to a much higher number of files being screened in was compliance with European Court of Justice and National case law that determined that it is not appropriate, at the Appropriate Assessment screening stage, to take account of the measures, intended to avoid or reduce the harmful effects of the project on a European site.
In relation to resources, the Department has invested heavily in both ecologist and forestry Inspector resources over the last 18-months in order to meet the needs of the licensing system. We now have 21 full time equivalent ecologists where previously we had one just 18-months ago. This has resulted in a significant improvement in the licensing output and we have set ourselves a target of 4,500 new licences this year which would be a 75% increase on last year.
