Phil Hogan, TD Minister for the Environment, Customs House, Dublin 31 July, 2012

Kilcatherine, Eyeries, County Cork
                           http://www.friendsoftheirishenvironment.org

Phil Hogan, TD
Minister for the Environment,
Customs House,
Dublin
31 July, 2012

                                                                  By email only: minister@environ.ie

Dear Minister;

We attach a joint NGO letter we have written to the Minister for Agriculture as part of the
stakeholder process requesting that he ensure that Food Harvest 2020 is subject to the
assessment required under the Habitats Directive. It is supported by 14 Irish non-governmental
environmental; organization, representing a wide range of concerns.

As you will be aware, Food Harvest 2020 is a strategy to increase Ireland’s primary food output
by 33%, food value–added by 40%, and food exports by 42%, between now and 2020. To
achieve this, milk and pig-meat production will increase by 50 per cent, beef and
sheep output by 20 per cent, poultry production by 10 per cent and fish farming
production by 78 per cent (since revised to 300%).

The Irish Habitats regulations require screening of ‘any plan, programme or scheme, statutory or
non-statutory, that establishes public policy in relation to land use’. [SI 477 of 2011, EUROPEAN
COMMUNITIES (BIRDS AND NATURAL HABITATS) REGULATIONS 2011] This must ensure
that on scientific grounds that individually or in combination with other plans or projects, such a
plan, programme or scheme will not have a significant effect on, or adversely affect the integrity
of, any site protected under European Law.

The Minister for Agriculture chairs the High Level Implementation Committee for Food Harvest
2020, The Committee’s position, however,, was that an ‘environmental analysis of various
scenarios related to the implementation of the recommendations in Food Harvest 2020’ was ‘the
most appropriate analytical approach to an environmental assessment.’ [Dail, Shane McEntee,
TD, other questions, Thursday, 10 May 2012]. The Minister position is that position as recently
confirmed to the media is that Food Harvest 2020 is an ‘an industry-developed strategy
which sets out its vision for the future of the sector’ and so not a Government ‘Plan’ as
defined under the European Directives.

The authors of Food Harvest 2020 themselves recommended that these proposals should be
subject to a Strategic Environmental Assessment [SEA] under that Directive but the Minister for
Agriculture, Food, and the Marine refused this recommendation.EPA's recent report 'Ireland's
Environment: An Assessment' states:

    Friends of the Irish Environment is a non-profit company limited by guarantee registered in Ireland.
        It is a member of the European Environmental Bureau and the Irish Environmental Network.
              Registered Office: Kilcatherine, Eyeries, Co Cork, Ireland. Company No. 326985.
                Tel & Fax: 353 (0)27 74771       Email: admin@friendsoftheirishenvironment.org
                                     Directors: Caroline Lewis, Tony Lowes

"The development strategy for the agriculture sector, Food Harvest 2020 proposes a 50%
        increase in milk production by 2020. While environmental sustainability is a key
        underlying principle of Food Harvest 2020, the milk production targets will present a
        significant challenge to meeting Water Framework Directive objectives. It is vital that
        future agricultural practices be developed and implemented to be fully sustainable, and
        not prevent Ireland from meeting its EU obligations in relation to water."

In these circumstances, we are advised that a formal Appropriate Assessment process is
required under the Habitats Directive. We note from your guidance ‘Appropriate Assessment of
Plans and Projects in Ireland Guidance for Planning Authorities’ that

        ‘AA has been a legal requirement in Ireland since the Habitats Regulations were made in
        1997. On 15 February 2008, and in response to the judgement of the European Court of
        Justice (ECJ) in case C-418/04, the Department of Environment, Heritage and Local
        Government (DEHLG) issued Circular Letter SEA 1/08 and NPWS 1/084, to all County
        and City Managers, Directors of Services for Planning, Town Clerks and Engineers. It
        informed them of the necessity to undertake AA of land use plans in accordance with the
        obligations of Article 6 of the Habitats Directive. The ECJ ruling had, among other things,
        clarified that Ireland has not correctly transposed Article 6(3) by not providing explicitly for
        AA of land use plans, as opposed to projects.

Food Harvest 2020 is a ‘plan’ or a ‘scheme’ being implemented by the Government through the
Minister’s Chairmanship of the High Level Implementation Committee and the support of
agencies under his administration, which include Animal Health Ireland,
BIM, Bord Bia, COFORD, Coillte, the Farm Animal Welfare Advisory Council, the Marine Institute,
the National Stud, the Pesticide Control Service (PCS), the Sea-Fisheries Protection Authority
(SFPA) , and Teagasc, the farm advisory service.

These Guidance notes confirm that

        ‘It is a basic responsibility of all agencies of the state, including planning authorities, to
        act diligently to ensure that their decisions in the exercise of their functions, as well as
        their actions, comply fully with the obligations of the Habitats Directive.’

Finally, we note that these Guidance Notes state that

        In cases of doubt as to whether a proposal constitutes a plan or project for the purposes
        of Article 6(3), it is recommended that contact should be made with the Department for
        advice.

We are, therefore, applying to you to provide us with your considerations and your advice
over the question if Food Harvest 2020 requires assessment under Article 6 of the Habitats
Directive.

Respectfully yours,

Pấdraic Fogarty, Chairman, Irish Wildlife Trust

and

Tony Lowes, Director, Friends of the Irish Environment

COPY
Mr. Noel O’Connor,
Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine,
Johnstown Castle Estate,
Wexford
                                  By email only: envanalysis@agriculture.gov.ie.

4 July 2012

Re: Requirement for Assessment of Food Harvest 2020

Dear Sirs;

We make this submission as part of the Stakeholder Consultation 1 in relation to
Food Harvest 2020 as published by the Department of Agriculture 2 on behalf of
the 16 environmental groups listed below, many of whom have contributed to its
content.

Introduction: Strategic Environmental Assessment
Food Harvest 2020 is a plan or programme as defined in Article 2 of Directive
2001/42/EC and Article 6 of the Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC. The adoption by
the State of an ‘industry-developed strategy which sets out its vision for the
future of the sector’ requires assessment under these Directives.

As Food Harvest 2020 acknowledges:

       ‘Capitalising on Ireland’s association with the colour green is pivotal to
       developing the marketing opportunity for Irish agri-food. This will build on
       our historic association with the colour and highlight the environmental
       credentials associated with our extensive, low-input, grass-based
       production systems. However, this ‘green’ image must be refined, be
       substantiated by scientific evidence and communicated effectively over the
       coming decade if Ireland’s commitment to sustainability and the
       implementation of world-class environmentalpractices is to become a
       platform for export growth. Ultimately, through the development of the
       ‘Brand Ireland’ concept, consumers in key markets will learn to recognise
       implicitly that, by buying Irish, they are choosing to value and respect the
       natural environment.’

In order to assure the reputation of Ireland and make the connection between
food production and sustainable development, Food Harvest 2020 itself correctly
reports that:

       ‘Environment deterioration is a global issue and consumer awareness has
       never been higher. While Ireland’s primary food production is sustainable
       and environmentally friendly, potential negative impacts on the
       environment must be addressed comprehensively and credibly. With this

1
  http://www.agriculture.gov.ie/media/migration/agri-
foodindustry/foodharvest2020/StakeholderConsultation110512.pdf
2
                                      http://www.agriculture.gov.ie/media/migration/agri-
foodindustry/foodharvest2020/2020FoodHarvestEng240810.pdf

in mind, a strategic environmental assessment of the impact of the
         recommendations of Food Harvest 2020 has been advised by the
         Committee.

This recommendation was not accepted by the High Level Implementation
Committee [HLIC], chaired by the Minister.

The Minister explained to the Dail that

         ‘In considering how best to implement this recommendation, the HLIC
         recognised that the targets could be achieved in a variety of ways.
         Accordingly the committee determined that an environmental analysis of
         various scenarios related to the implementation of the recommendations
         in Food Harvest 2020 was the most appropriate analytical approach to an
         environmental assessment.’ 3

‘The most appropriate analytical approach’ is the recommended SEA.

Habitat protection
Notwithstanding the Minister’s rejection of this recommendation of Food Harvest
2020 under the SEA Directive, a formal environmental assessment is required
under the Habitats Directive. Habitat loss in Ireland has been well documented by
the national authorities with the 2007 Article 17 Report under the Habitats
Directive stating that ‘only 7% of the habitats examined are in good status, with
46% inadequate and 47% bad’. Species categorized as bad were all dependent
on freshwater for at least some parts of their life cycles. 4

The assessment required to protect these habitats and species consists of an
initial screening process to ‘identify and characterise any possible implications of
the plan or project’ for the 14% of Ireland that is protected under European
Natura 2000 Sites. If it cannot then be excluded, on the basis of objective
scientific information, that the plan individually or in combination with other plans
or projects, will have a significant effect on a European site, the proposed plan
must then subjected to a formal Appropriate Assessment including a Natura
Impact Statement, public consultation, and a decision on the proposed plan in
accordance with the requirements of the Habitats Directive.

The Minister, as Chair of the High Level Implementation Committee, may only
implement Food Harvest 2020 after having undertaken this assessment. The
assessment must take place before the plan is adopted or implemented. There
may already be an infringement of the Habitats Directive as Food Harvest 2020
policies are currently being promoted by the Minister and his Agencies.

Fish farming
Further, fish farming has been excluded from the current environmental analysis
on the grounds that it has already been assessed. The Stakeholder Consultation
document claims that:

         ‘As the increased production envisaged for seafood and aquaculture under
         FH 2020 have already been appropriately assessed, in order to avoid
         duplication, this sector is excluded from this exercise.’

3
 Dáil debates, Thursday, 10 May 2012, Food Harvest 2020
4
 The Status of Habitats and Species in Ireland, National Parks and Wildlife Service, 2008
http://www.npws.ie/publications/euconservationstatus/NPWS_2007_Conservation_Status_Report.pdf

In fact, the Department has confirmed to us that the assessment referred to is
BIM’s October 2008 ‘Irish National Seafood Plan: Environmental Report’. 5

This was a 2008 study that assessed the implications of an increase in fish
farming of 78%, largely by intensification at the exciting locations. Food Harvest
2020 copies this 78% increase target for aquaculture production between 2010
and 2020 but Our Ocean Wealth, the recent consultation document intended to
inform an ‘Integrated Marine Plan’ for Ireland reveals that contrary to the 78%
increase projected in Food Harvest 2020:

         ‘There is significant scope for aquaculture expansion in Ireland, including
         in deep water sites. It is estimated that each new large-scale deep water
         salmon farming site could generate an extra €100m in exports per annum
         and create 350 direct jobs with a further 150 indirect jobs in service sector
         supplying fish feed, netting, transportation and other services. Work is
         underway to examine and prepare three suitable deep water sites. 6 ‘

BIM presentations have confirmed this proposal and significant resources have
been applied by that organization in the preparation of an Environmental Impact
Assessment and license application for the first of these sites in Galway Bay that
will alone double Ireland’s current production. All of this 300% increase in
production target is in new locations, and flatlycontradicts the 2008 concept of
‘maximising the potential of existing licensed sites’.

Forestry
Forestry policy is still based on the 1996 Growing for the Future, even though
planting rates are more than 50% less than those necessary to achieve ‘critical
mass’ and so the long term investment required for economic viability.

The impact of the missed targets was confirmed in 2003 7 which also identified
‘increasing contradiction in policy between income protection and the
maximisation of economic returns from further development of forestry’. Ireland’s
potential to develop agroforestry systems could bring long-term economic, social
and environmental benefits which can only be identified through appropriate
analysis before current policies which exclude this form of agriculture are further
renewed.

Health, waste, and renewable energy
Food Harvest 2020 itself rightly stresses again and again the importance of
Ireland’s ‘environmental credentials’. In fact, Ireland’s environmental credibility
would be undermined if the European public was aware that Ireland has the
highest level of some of the waterborne diseases and parasites in Europe. 8

The rate of cryptosporidium infection is the highest in Europe; the e-coli
STEC/VTEC case rate is more than double any other EU state. Both are directly
(but not solely) related to the inadequate treatment of waste from agricultural
activities. And in turn, part of that cause is the failure of Ireland to adopt modern
treatment procedures for agricultural waste – specifically anaerobic digestion.

5
   http://www.bim.ie/media/bim/content/publications/National_Seafood_Plan_Environmental_Report.pdf
6
  http://www.ouroceanwealth.ie/SiteCollectionDocuments/FINAL%20CONSULTATION%20DOCUMENT%20O
ur%20Ocean%20Wealth.pdf
7
   Forestry: A Growth Industry in Ireland, Peter Bacon and Associates, June 2003
http://www.coillte.ie/fileadmin/templates/pdfs/BaconReport.pdf
8
  http://ecdc.europa.eu/en/publications/Publications/1111_SUR_Annual_Epidemiological_Report_on_Communica
ble_Diseases_in_Europe.pdf

Food Harvest 2020 itself does no more than give this issue two token references
to ‘pilot projects and a pilot forum’ and a recommendation that the pig sector
should ‘urgently investigate alternative waste usage and disposal options from
the pig sector, such as energy/heat production’.

There are 4,500 anaerobic digestion plants in Germany, 4,000 of which are farm
based contributing to Germany’s requirement to produce renewable energy. The
farm animal manure as well as food waste and spoilt silage bails are transformed
into fuel and an organic but low nutrient final waste product. Ireland has a
handful of these digestion plants, most still struggling to move to full scale
production. At the same time farmers are already increasing stock and gearing up
to implement Food Harvest 2020.

The waste produced by the increased production is also removed from land
spreading with its impacts on water quality through eutrophication. It is unlikely
that government will be able to avert the foreseeable water pollution issues if we
implement Food Harvest 2020 without a major shift in how we handle this waste.
Can we afford a policy which brings virtually certain breach of the Nitrates
Regulations and the Water Framework Directive in Ireland? Is achieving the
targets contingent on maintaining nitrates derogation post 2013? The Minister
suggested so in a recent parliamentary reply:

          During 2010, Ireland reviewed its Nitrates Action programme putting in
          place a second Action Programme. As part of this process, Ireland’s
          request to extend the derogation was granted by the Commission and this
          new derogation runs to the end of 2013, coinciding with the end of the
          second Nitrates Action Programme.

          The renewal of the derogation underpins the efforts of Ireland’s agri-food
          sector to meet its targets under the Food Harvest 2020 strategy. It sets
          additional requirements on those farming at higher stocking rates to
          ensure their farming systems are sustainable and environmentally sound
          including a requirement for full nutrient management planning for the unit.
          My Department is committed to the proper implementation of the national
          derogation to ensure its continuance and to environmentally responsible
          farming. 9

The Derogation granted by the Commission was based on a decrease in the
stocking rates on Irish farms, citing a decline in cattle, pig and sheep numbers of
7%, 3%, and 17% in the period 1997 – 2004. 10 The increase in numbers
proposed by Food Harvest 2020 undermines the rational of the Derogation. If
consequently a new request for Derogation is refused post 2013, how can the
targets of Food Harvest 2020 be met without infringing the Water Framework
Directive?

The impacts of climate change on agriculture also require assessment if the
proposed targets are to be met. The Heritage Council highlighted the increasing
danger that agriculture production poses to the environment due to climate
change impacts in its submission to the Department’s 2020 Strategy. It
suggested that the changing climate even without increases in stocking rates will
result in the production of additional waste:

9
  Tuesday, 29 November 2011, Department of Agriculture, Food, and the Marine, Nitrates Directive. Deputy
Catherine Murphy also asked for the ‘fallback strategy if Ireland fails to achieve a further derogation’ but this issue
was not addressed in the Minister’s reply. http://debates.oireachtas.ie/dail/2011/11/29/00352.asp
10
   Commission Decision of 22/X/2007, C (2007) 5095 final
http://www.environ.ie/en/Legislation/Environment/Water/FileDownLoad,25135,en.pdf

Other impacts of climate change on agriculture are likely to exacerbate
        water quality issues. Changes in rainfall patterns will affect grass
        production, which will require new grazing/housing patterns (Holden et al
        in Sweeney, 2008). This in turn could result in the need for disposal of
        additional animal waste/slurry – this will then put greater pressure on the
        need to control diffuse pollution into our surface and ground waters. 11

Anaerobic digestion is in fact the biomass circle. The farmer grows the crop. That
feeds the livestock. Gases are captured from livestock waste and turned into
energy.

The Minister recently informed the Dail that ‘The last Government introduced an
anaerobic digester grant aid scheme for which farmers could apply. Just two of
the ten applications that were made have actually progressed.’ 12

When agriculture’s contribution to the mix of renewable energy is considered,
Food Harvest 2010 correctly notes:

        While opportunities for renewable energy should be exploited where
        possible, care is required to ensure no conflicts with environmental
        sustainability requirements, food security, and with other industries.
        Specific examples would be the need for improved planning in marine and
        terrestrial environments to ensure renewable developments do not
        compromise fisheries or biodiversity interests. Sound application of new
        and existing measures such as a strategic environmental
        assessment and the Marine Strategy Framework Directive provide
        tools to help avoid these potential conflicts. [Author’s emphasis.]

The Sub-Committee on ‘Job Creation Through Use of Renewable Energy
Resources’ Debate on 22 July 2009 13 was told of changes in this area that
continue to make anaerobic digestion more attractive – issues which are absent
from Food Harvest 2020 because of its failure to assess anaerobic digestion at a
national strategic level. These include:

        ‘combined heat and power plants; higher prices being paid for electricity
        generated; the advent of district heating; more stringent environmental
        legislation pertaining to the regulation of the disposal of waste; the
        cessation of the disposal of organic matter to landfill; and the nitrates
        directive, which prohibits excessive nutrient application to farmland. New
        uses for digestate, particularly the liquid fraction, are being examined,
        including its use as a fertiliser for willow and miscanthus. These crops are
        growing in importance as there is a growing market for woodchip and
        wood pellets for home heating.’ 14

The Sub-Committee was informed that:

        ‘The changes to the regulatory framework concerning how we deal with
        waste and the increasing costs of importing fossil fuels are resulting in an
        environment in which anaerobic digestion, if correctly planned and

11
   http://www.agriculture.gov.ie/media/migration/agri-
foodindustry/foodharvest2020/foodharvest2020/submissionsreceived/Heritage%20Council%20Submission%20on
%202020%20Strategy.pdf
12
   http://www.kildarestreet.com/debates/?id=2012-06-14.399.0&s=climate+change#g408.2
13
   http://debates.oireachtas.ie/BUE/2009/07/22/00003.asp
14
   http://debates.oireachtas.ie/BUE/2009/07/22/00003.asp

executed, is becoming economically viable. For example, to comply with
            the landfill directive’s target of removing all organic matter from landfill by
            2016, this country would be required to develop additional capacity to
            manage upwards of 1 million tonnes of organic matter. Much, if not all, of
            this could be utilised in anaerobic digestion to generate bio-gas heat and
            power. The resulting digestate, after further treatment, could be utilised
            as a soil conditioner or, after further drying through the CHP system, could
            be used as a biofuel itself.’

A key issue that has held back the agricultural sector in developing anaerobic
digestion along continental models is the failure to work hand in hand with the
Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources.

As the Dail Committee was told:

‘While the tendering system has worked for wind energy production, it does not
suit anaerobic digestion. It has worked in Germany, France and Spain which
operate a feed-in-tariff system, whereby the large plants receive a lower price,
while the smaller plants receive a higher price. Any operation under 500 kW is
much easier to embed in the ESB network and it means a turn around time of six
months as opposed to a two to three year queue for grid access.’

Conclusion
Ireland already has the highest number of environmental infringement
proceedings per capita in the EU. Nationally, this failure to legally assess Food
Harvest 2020 risks contributing further to this record and undermines the
Government’s Strategy Statement 2011 – 2014 15, which calls on all Ministers and
Departments to ‘Help to reform and restore trust in the institutions of the State,
and in Ireland’s reputation at home and abroad, learning lessons from the past.’

We request that you immediately take steps to comply with the requirements of
the SEA, Habitats and Birds Directives and that you let us know of your plans in
this regard without delay. In the absence of such assurances, we think it only fair
to point out that some of the signatory groups will consider taking appropriate
further steps such as legal action and/or formal complaints to ensure that
environmental law is implemented in Ireland.

Respectfully yours,

Tony Lowes and Caroline Lewis, Directors,
Friends of the Irish Environment

And on behalf of:
An Taisce, Bat Conservation Ireland, BirdWatch Ireland, Coastwatch Europe,
Feasta, Friends of the Earth, Friends of the Irish Environment, Forestfriends,
Global Action Plan, Hedgelaying Association of Ireland, Irish Doctors
Environmental Association, Irish Wildlife Trust, Irish Natural Forestry Foundation,
Just Forests, The Organic Centre.

15
     http://www.taoiseach.gov.ie/eng/Publications/Publications_2012/Strategy_Statement_2011_-_2014.pdf

ANNEX II

17 January 2012

Re: Requirement to double stocking rates in Disadvantaged Areas / Mountain
Sheep Grazing in Ireland

Ireland's non-sustainable intensification in agriculture

Dear Commissioner

We are greatly concerned about the application Ireland is making to the
Commission to require the doubling of the stocking rate in Disadvantaged Areas/
Less Favoured Areas (LFAs) from 0.15 LU/ha to 0.30 LU/ha and to hold this stock
for six months rather than the previous three months.

These increases in stocking rates impact on LFAs that are deemed disadvantaged
due to agricultural handicaps and were originally called Mountain Sheep Grazing,
areas with fragile soils and extensive mountain blanket bogs. High stocking rates
have led in the past to a host of environmental problems, including erosion,
eutrophication, soil degradation, and increased carbon emissions. The impact is
particularly great from sheep, which exert greater mechanical pressure and are
social by nature, further intensifying the damage.

This damage was confirmed by the European Court of Justice in 2002 in a
judgement [Case C-117/00] condemning this overgrazing because of its impact
on Birds. The Directive under which this case was brought requires "upkeep and
management in accordance with the ecological needs of habitats inside and
outside the protected zones." While stocking rates are now far lower than at the
time of the ECJ judgment, erosion damage to some mountains in LFAs caused by
sheep would will require many more years, if at all, for complete recovery to their
original carrying capacity.

The recent announcement of the requirement to intensify land use in these areas
does not accord with this Judgment of the Court. It is contrary to good
environmental practices in that it will lead to increased use of fertilizers on these

sensitive soils, increased erosion through overgrazing and poaching, siltation and
pollution of surface waters. These will in turn adversely impact on wildlife,
including birds, some of which are migratory in nature and for which therefore
Ireland bears a special European responsibility.

This requirement for intensification will put great pressure on a community of
rural farmers who are already hard pressed through national economic
austerities. It will contribute therefore to increasing the restructuring of rural land
holdings with a consequent social loss. It is accepted by all parties that reduction
in farmer numbers, together with the consequent enlargement of farms, is
resulting in the longstanding familial association with archaeological sites
becoming significantly eroded with an increasing rate of destruction. This is
particularly acute in the LFAs, which overlap not only designated nature sites but
a rich archaeological heritage.

In fact there should be no question whatsoever of increasing stocking rates in
Natura 2000 sites. Article 6(2) of the Habitats Directive, like the first sentence of
Article 4(4) of the Birds Directive, requires Member States to take appropriate
steps to avoid, inter alia, deterioration of habitats in these sites. These Directives
also require the protection of flora and fauna even when they occur outside a
designated site. Commonages, national proposed Natural Heritage Areas sites,
whether yet established in Irish statue or not, cannot sustain intensification of
stocking rates.

Coastal areas adjacent to Shellfish Waters must also be protected from the
nutrient enrichment in the run off from eroded soils caused by increased
production targets leading to 'dead zones' in the receiving waters. Areas
designated for the protection of drinking water abstraction require legal
protection from contamination of water supplies with e-coli and parasites, impacts
which were documented in the proceedings brought by the Commission resulting
in the adverse 2002 ECJ ruling against Ireland.

Exemptions that would under law have to be granted would be so extensive in the
Disadvantaged Areas as to render the process tautological.

We wrote to the Irish Minister for Agriculture Simon Covenet on 14 December,
2011 about this issue but have had no substantive reply. He has indicated that he
is applying to the Commission for approval for these changes.

Would you request your officials to address this issue during your forthcoming
visit to Ireland and ensure that development that meets the needs of the present
does not come at the cost of the future of Ireland's delicate and unique natural
environment?

We wish you a thousand welcomes to Ireland and hope that you will enjoy your
visit.

Respectfully yours,

Tony Lowes

ANNEX III

Mr Janez Potočnik,
Environmental Commissioner
B-1049 Brussels, Belgium
15 November, 2011

                                   Email only: janez.potocnik@ec.europa.eu

Re: Nitrates Regulations: fertiliser spreading during the closed period in
                        Ireland in October 2011

Dear Commissioner;

We have noted your reply to a Parliamentary Question from Irish MEP Marian
Harkin [E-9725/2010] seeking ‘the spreading of nutrients when weather
conditions are appropriate rather than insisting on the system of fixed periods
currently in force’.

The essence of your reply on 10 January, 2011 was

       “The contention that fertiliser spreading be permitted during times
       of occasional suitable weather during the closed period overlooks
       the fact that growth is either very limited or not taking place which
       would mean that the risk of leaching, particularly of nitrates into
       ground and surface water would be very high. Likewise, weather
       forecasting is not sufficiently precise as to ensure fertiliser would
       not be subject to run off and leaching in the event of poor weather
       following application, particularly when such conditions frequently
       occur during the established closed periods.”

Notwithstanding your statement Mr. Phil Hogan TD, Minister for the Environment,
Community and Local Government, announced on 12 October, 2011 a derogation
for the spreading slurry until the end of October 2011, providing an extension of
two weeks from the 15 October deadline, as laid down in the Nitrates
Regulations. Simon Coveney TD, Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine
welcomed the announcement. Both Press Releases are attached.

We wish to make the following comments.

Human Health – drinking water and slurry spreading
In addition to the issue of nutrient leaching to which you referred, we have recently
been analysing water quality in Ireland 2002 – 2009 based on figures provided by the
Environmental Protection Agency and are greatly concerned at the persistent and
widespread exceedences of legal parametric values. We attach an Irish Times article
covering our work to date published on Monday 7 November, 2011 entitled: ‘Future
Water Contamination Inevitable if Strict Policy Not Adopted to Protect Resource’.

In fact, 1,153,732 consumers are now being supplied with drinking water from
supplies which have been placed on the Remedial Action List because of persistent
exceedences of the legal parameters for biological and chemical limits, although the
authorities have failed to accord with Council Directive 98/83/EC and Irish S.I. No.
278, both of which require public notification of supplies requiring remediation.

Cryptosporidium
In particular, we are concerned over the level of the parasite cryptosporidium, which
is now widespread in the aquatic environment to the point where the scientist
studying this area have reported recently that cryptosporidium has been found in
almost every sample they have taken. We attach their first publication on
Cryptosporidium in Lough Arrow, where the abstraction of drinking water ‘poses
definite public health risks’ and which identifies the spreading of slurry as a
contributing factor, as does the EPA Risk Assessment for Cryptosporidium.

This situation is highlighted by the last Report of the European Centre for
Communicable Diseases which states that Ireland has the highest rate of
cryptosporidiosis in Europe. 16

16
   All tables and charts: Report of the European Centre for Communicable Diseases Annual epidemiological report on
communicable diseases in Europe 2010.
http://ecdc.europa.eu/en/publications/publications/1011_SUR_Annual_Epidemiological_Report_on_Communicable_Dis
eases_in_Europe.pdf

14

The parasite cryptosporidium is not affected by chlorination. The minimalistic Irish
buffer zone of 2 metres from water bodies used for abstraction is a further
contributory factor.

It is also noteworthy that the incidence of cryptosporidium is at its highest in
September and October - the period for which the Irish allowed an extension of slurry
spreading.

STEC
Ireland also recorded the highest confirmed case rate for a potentially fatal disease
know as STEC/VTEC [Vero/shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli] caused by infection
with verocytoxin, a strain [E. coli 0157’ ] of the usually harmless bacterium
Escherichia coli (e coli). The main hosts for these strains are cattle. While
transmission is primarily through undercooked meat and milk products, transmission
also occurs from contaminated drinking water and infection has also recorded by
swallowing contaminated lake water while swimming.

In 2009, the average notification rate of VTEC across 30 European countries was 0.86
cases per 100,000 populations. Ireland had a notification rate of 5.33 cases per
100,000.

Ireland reported the highest increase in Notification rates in Europe from 2.7 cases
per 100 000 in 2007 to 4.8 cases per 100 000 in 2008. The seasonal distribution is
similar to cryptosporidium.

We attach a paper ‘Cryptosporidium and E. coli 0157’ from The Geological Service of
Ireland Groundwater Newsletter No. 32 of November, 1997.

15

Weather
The prescience of your comments about the imprecision of weather forecasting and
the fact that adverse conditions ‘frequently occur during the established closed
periods’ is made clear by the following two tables. Both are provided by the Irish
Meteorological Service. The first shows that by far the greatest rainfall in October
2011 was in the second half of the month, ie. the period of the extension made in
spite of your stated position:

The second shows the percentage difference from the monthly normal caused by the
rainfalls recorded in the second half of the month.

A Metrological Office document detailing the ‘one in sixty year event’ that affected the
North East of Ireland on 24 October, 2011 states:

       “Although significant amounts affected many areas, the greater Dublin Area
       received by far the most rainfall. Our station at Casement Aerodrome set a
       new record of 82.2 mm for the greatest daily total for the month of October,
       since rainfall records began there in 1954. The majority of the rainfall occurred
       during the period from 2 pm to 8 pm on 24 October 2011 with approximately
       60 mm falling in 4 hours at Casement Aerodrome. This 4-hour fall is
       approximately a 1 in 60 year event.”

16

The intensity of the ‘Monster Rainfall’ experiences affecting soils that already have a
negative soil moisture deficit combined with the slowing seasonal growth less able to
absorb the nutrients meant that almost all of this material went into watercourses,
rivers, and the sea with the adverse environmental and public health impacts.

The only long term solution that will permit increased beef and milk production while
still ensuring the protection of the environment and human health is anaerobic
digestion, as is done elsewhere in Europe.

This will not come to Ireland if the farmers believe they can continue breaching
environmental and health controls through unsustainable expansion to meet the
targets in the current Government policy ‘Food Harvest 2020’. This policy plans
increasing exports by 42% compared to the base years 2007-09 (and incidentally
increasing Ireland’s greenhouse gas emissions by 4%, according to the Irish EPA).
Agricultural exports increased by 13% in the first 5 months of 2011.

Conclusion
In these circumstances, we would be most grateful if you raised this issue with the
Irish authorities and

   •   sought a commitment by the Irish Government not to again derogate
       from the terms of the Nitrates Regulations controls on slurry
       spreading

   •   reviewed the current buffer zone of 2 metres to determine if it offers
       the required protection of drinking water from contamination by slurry
       spreading

   •   address the failure of Ireland to put adequate measures in place to
       protect surface and ground waters intended for use as drinking water
       under the Drinking Water Directive and the Water Framework
       Directive

   •
Yours, etc.,

Tony Lowes,
Director

17

18

Annex IIa: Parliamentary questions
26 November 2010 E-9725/2010

Parliamentary questions
26 November 2010                                                           E-9725/2010
Question for written answer
to the Commission
Rule 117
Marian Harkin (ALDE)

 Subject: Irish requirements under the Nitrates Directive                     Answer(s)
                                                                              2

The existing system of calendar farming, as provided for by the Nitrates Directive
(91/676/EEC) in Ireland, can result in adverse outcomes for water resources during
periods of bad weather.

While it is essential that EU water resources are adequately protected under the
requirements of the Nitrates Directive, why is it not possible to have a mechanism
which can permit the spreading of nutrients when weather conditions are appropriate
rather than insisting on the system of fixed periods currently in force?

Parliamentary questions 4 January 2011
Answer given by Mr Potočnik on behalf of the Commission                    E-9725/2010

With respect to action programmes, the Nitrates directive requires that rules be
established relating to periods when the land application of certain types of fertiliser
is prohibited. The main reasons are that at certain times of the year there is little or
no uptake of fertiliser by plants, that weather conditions generally are conducive to
run off of applied fertilisers and or that land is saturated. The length of the closed
period varies both within and between Member States reflecting general weather
conditions, soil type, relief, land cover and crop type.

Ireland's approach is similar to that of other Member States. Ireland has established
three different closed periods for different areas of the country and also prohibits
fertiliser application during periods of snow, frost, heavy rain and land saturation
outside theses fixed periods.

The contention that fertiliser spreading be permitted during times of occasional
suitable weather during the closed period overlooks the fact that growth is either
very limited or not taking place which would mean that the risk of leaching,
particularly of nitrates into ground and surface water would be very high. Likewise,
weather forecasting is not sufficiently precise as to ensure fertiliser would not be
subject to run off and leaching in the event of poor weather following application,
particularly when such conditions frequently occur during the established closed
periods.

19

Annex IIb
Press Releases from Minister for Environment and Minister for Agriculture
announcing derogation for slurry spreading in October 2011

Hogan announces extension to Period for Spreading of Slurry

12/10/11

Mr. Phil Hogan TD, Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government,
today (12/10/2011) announced that, farmers will be allowed as an exceptional
measure to spread slurry until the end of October, 2011.

He made this decision following consultation with Simon Coveney, TD, Minister for
Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and taking account of poor weather conditions in
particular during the month of September.

Minister Hogan said that farmers have expressed concerns to him about their ability
to meet the 15 October deadline for spreading slurry, as laid down in the Nitrates
Regulations. In recognition of this, the Minister believes that the extension now being
given is necessary, as the adverse weather conditions experienced in Ireland during
September, in particular, have caused significant hardship for farmers and have
made it extremely difficult to carry out regular farming activity.
"The high rainfall levels have meant that many farmers, mindful of the requirements
of best practice in relation to spreading slurry, have struggled to complete their
normal landspreading operations before the start of the prohibited period on 15
October.

This two week extension will allow farmers an opportunity, weather and ground
conditions permitting, to complete landspreading activities that for reasons outside of
their control, have been curtailed during late August and throughout September
owing to the exceptional weather conditions that we have experienced."
The Minister stressed that his announcement represents an extension of time only.
All landspreading activity is conditional on weather and ground conditions being
suitable as set out in the Nitrates Regulations. Livestock manures or any fertilisers
may not be landspread when, for example, land is waterlogged, flooded or likely to
flood, frozen or if heavy rain is forecast within 48 hours. Buffer zones are specified
for different kinds of water bodies and fertilisers may not be applied within those
buffer zones. However, for the period of the extension farmers are advised to adhere
to wider buffer zones. In addition, the absolute prohibition on landspreading during
the months of November and December remains.

Ends

http://www.environ.ie/en/Environment/Water/WaterQuality/NitratesDirective/News/
MainBody,28058,en.htm

20

Minister Coveney Welcomes Extension to Period for Spreading of Slurry

Simon Coveney TD, Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine welcomes the
announcement today by his colleague Mr. Phil Hogan, Minister for the Environment,
Community and Local Government on granting an extension for the spreading of
slurry to the 31 October.

Minister Coveney said that "the weather conditions in September, with very high
rainfall, made conditions for farming particularly difficult. The granting of the
extension will alleviate the pressures on farmers".

Minister Coveney said he had worked closely with Minister Hogan on this issue and
was very pleased that the extension now granted would be of benefit to farmers
heading into the Autumn and Winter seasons. He said the efficient use of organic
fertiliser was a hugely important and cost effective input in modern farming, the use
of which had to be carefully handled and balanced with environmental demands.

Date Released: 12 October 2011

http://www.agriculture.gov.ie/press/pressreleases/2011/october/title,58806,en.html