'No to more slash and burn!'

OpenYourEyes

Yesterday a petition was set up by Birdwatch Ireland, the Irish Wildlife Trust, An Taisce and the Hedge Laying Association of Ireland, in response to the recently announced changes to the law to allow for a longer period of hedgecutting and burning of vegetation. Our wildlife is impacted every year by our existing laws in these regards as they are often abused, so to extend them into the breeding season is sure to impact a whole host of wildlife - many of which are already of serious conservation concern.

The petition asks the Minister to reverse this decision and to instead put into place proper hedgerow and upland management regimes that works for farming, road safety and wildlife.

In the space of a day the petition has amassed over 3,500 signatures, and I'd encourage everyone to sign it and show their support:

https://my.uplift.ie/petitions/no-to-more-slash-and-burn?source=facebook-share-button&time=1453128851

savagethegoat

already done that and shared it on my facebook

OpenYourEyes

Update: The petition has reached almost 7,000 signatures and is still growing! The Bill is being debated in the Seanad today, so it's well worth getting friends or family members to take a few seconds to sign it!

OpenYourEyes

It's a very rare occurrence to hear a politician speak with any level of concern or appreciation for nature, wildlife or conservation in Ireland.

With that in mind, it should be noted that Senators John Whelan, David Norriss, Gerard Craughwell, Mairia Cahill all spoke out against this proposed 'Heritage Bill 2016' which will extend the hedgecutting and burning seasons into the breeding season.

Here is a transcript of Senator John Whelans speech yesterday, taken from the An Taisce facebook page:

"I welcome the Minister to the House. With all due respect to her, however, I do not welcome the Bill and it does not enjoy my support. Indeed, it will not enjoy my support and I am minded to vote against it. I do not lay the charge at the door of the Minister but I call on her to ensure she does not leave this as her legacy. She should not allow this to be the last legislation she puts on the Statute Book before the Dáil is dissolved and we go to the country in a general election.

Serious issues are at stake. I have no wish to fall foul of the farming community but certainly I am crying foul today. The Minister, her officials and those behind this legislation cannot speak out of both sides of their mouths on this matter. The Minister cannot say that she is in favour of balance and biodiversity while introducing this Bill. Section 40 is an assault on the landscape and habitat. It is an assault on conservation, our wildlife and our natural heritage. I note that the Title of the Bill is rather innocuous - the Heritage Bill 2016. It is a Trojan horse for an attack on our heritage. It represents an assault on our natural heritage and landscape. No one in his right mind would extend the hedge-cutting, hedge-burning and scrub-burning season by a full two months while claiming to have any regard for wildlife, heritage, conservation or habitats. I strenuously oppose that section and I urge the Minister to reconsider it. It should be withdrawn and I hope it makes no further progress in this House. Moreover, I hope it makes no progress in the Lower House and that time betrays and delays it to the point where it falls with the Government and never sees the light of day again.

I live in the countryside. All the decent farmers I know respect the landscape, habitats and nature. They believe biodiversity is important for food production and the balance of nature. They know it is important for all other aspects of a sustainable lifestyle in the countryside, including those referred to previously, such as tourism and natural heritage, aspects which attracts so many visitors.
I am sick and tired of people speaking out of both sides of their mouths, talking about our natural heritage and how much they respect, love and value it. This is not valuing our natural heritage, wildlife, flora or fauna. Is the Minister honestly trying to tell me that the farmers of this country need two further months in the year to tend to hedgerows? I do not think so.
I have heard it all today. While I have great respect for my colleagues, Senator Eamonn Coghlan and Senator Michael Comiskey, from whom I take advice on agricultural and farming matters, and indeed I take advice on other matters from Senator Coghlan, I did not know until today that hedgerows throughout this country have a habit of attacking people. It is absurd to suggest that the briary thorns of a blackberry bush amount to just cause to bring in these draconian measures.

Everyone should tend to their hedgerows. The landscape should be maintained and we must have balance, but there is already provision in the case of road safety issues. If road safety concerns arise, the law already provides for intervention to deal with it. It is a ruse to suggest there are road safety or pedestrian safety issues. It is a guise to introduce this measure under a two-year pilot programme. It will never be clawed back or rolled back. It will be in place forever.

People come to this House week after week saying they are concerned about our heritage. What about the curlew, the golden plover, the skylark, the meadow pipet, the yellowhammer, the greenfinch and the linnet? They will be decimated if we desecrate the hedgerows in March and August as proposed in this legislation. It is absurd. There has not been adequate consultation. The Bill was published in Christmas week. Now, here we are trying to sneak it through in the dying days of the Government and the House. It is not necessary. I know of no farmers calling for this measure. If there are unique examples or extenuating circumstances where hedgerows have to be addressed, there is already provision in law for that to be tackled. We are here talking about green food, green technology, green energy, green economy and green jobs. It is paying lip service. There are talks about climate change. There is nothing green about the provisions in this Bill. There is nothing pro-heritage in the proposals in section 40. It is anti-environment, anti-conservation and anti-habitat. It is an attack on the wildlife and the countryside of this country. It is not pro-rural Ireland. Most right-thinking farmers and landowners would agree with me that there is adequate provision in law to address hedgerows in the existing timeframe and if one needs to extend beyond that, one can seek permission to do so as it is allowed. We are here blue in the face paying lip service to the climate change issue.

This is a further attack on the countryside. It is not good for the economy, for the countryside or for our conservation policies. It is an attack on the landscape, and that is even before I get to the issues around the canal by-laws. The Minister's predecessor, the Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach, Deputy Deenihan, tried to introduce those and we saw them off three years ago, and now here we have another Trojan horse attempt to sneak them in before the Government is dissolved. Those by-laws are not robust by-laws. They are also draconian by-laws to curb ordinary decent people trying to use the canals of this country.
I do not agree with this Bill. It does not enjoy my support and I will not be supporting it."

OpenYourEyes

The petition has reached nearly 10,000 signatures in a short number of days - well worth getting friends and family to take the few seconds to sign it, to keep up the pressure on the Minister and try to ensure these proposals never see the light of day:

https://my.uplift.ie/petitions/no-to-more-slash-and-burn

OpenYourEyes

The petition is now at over 12,000 signatures!

https://my.uplift.ie/petitions/no-to-more-slash-and-burn

It has gotten some media attention too - see the below article from the Irish Times:
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/thousands-oppose-proposal-to-extend-hedge-cutting-season-1.2508560?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter


An IFA representative is quoted as having said that the last thing farmers want to do is harm birds, and yet he has actively lobbied for these changes that every bird expert in the country says will harm birds, and birds of high conservation concern at that! While I have no doubt that the majority of farmers indeed don't want to harm birds, these changes will give them a false sense of security - if its legal then surely its no causing any harm? Unfortunately that's not the case!

Manach

I would be against this. It both is yet more encrouchment by the state on property rights and interferes with rural life. The state only cares for whatever it can squeeze from general populace - any verbage pertaining to their stepping in and protecting wildlife by engendering more bureaucratic oversight should be rejected for the reality dissonance that it it.

At the end of day, I have some land set aside to ensure that wildlife is thriving and part of the living ecosystem that is the right thing to do and is part of tradition rural heritage and not imposed by the state or a plethora of NGOs via a click and legislate regime. Governments come and go, the tradition of respect for the countryside being eroded by such action will engender ill will that will last.

OpenYourEyes

Manach wrote: »

I would be against this. It both is yet more encrouchment by the state on property rights and interferes with rural life. The state only cares for whatever it can squeeze from general populace - any verbage pertaining to their stepping in and protecting wildlife by engendering more bureaucratic oversight should be rejected for the reality dissonance that it it.

At the end of day, I have some land set aside to ensure that wildlife is thriving and part of the living ecosystem that is the right thing to do and is part of tradition rural heritage and not imposed by the state or a plethora of NGOs via a click and legislate regime. Governments come and go, the tradition of respect for the countryside being eroded by such action will engender ill will that will last.

I'm not exactly clear on what you're saying - are you against the proposed changes to the Wildlife Act, or against the Wildlife Act itself?

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

Manach wrote: »

I would be against this. It both is yet more encrouchment by the state on property rights and interferes with rural life. The state only cares for whatever it can squeeze from general populace - any verbage pertaining to their stepping in and protecting wildlife by engendering more bureaucratic oversight should be rejected for the reality dissonance that it it.

At the end of day, I have some land set aside to ensure that wildlife is thriving and part of the living ecosystem that is the right thing to do and is part of tradition rural heritage and not imposed by the state or a plethora of NGOs via a click and legislate regime. Governments come and go, the tradition of respect for the countryside being eroded by such action will engender ill will that will last.

You lost me. Should hedges be cut after March or not? The world is filled with laws. We all have laws that govern our day to day lives whether we want them or not.

If you feel this activity should be allowed further in to the year, can you give the basis for a need for it?

Woodville56

Manach wrote: »

I would be against this. It both is yet more encrouchment by the state on property rights and interferes with rural life. The state only cares for whatever it can squeeze from general populace - any verbage pertaining to their stepping in and protecting wildlife by engendering more bureaucratic oversight should be rejected for the reality dissonance that it it.

At the end of day, I have some land set aside to ensure that wildlife is thriving and part of the living ecosystem that is the right thing to do and is part of tradition rural heritage and not imposed by the state or a plethora of NGOs via a click and legislate regime. Governments come and go, the tradition of respect for the countryside being eroded by such action will engender ill will that will last.

I don't see this Slash & Burn policy as having anything to do with the State squeezing whatever it can from the populace to be honest . To my mind it's a purely cynical political sop to a strongly vocal and influential farming lobby, many of whom are pro intensification of farming output irrespective of the impact on biodiversity. Coming from a farming background and community, I know that this slash and burn agenda is not a widespread movement among the farming community , just as the IFA isn't representative of all farmers, many of whom have a real and deep appreciation and understanding of nature in all its forms and seasons. The Minister in her wisdom ? chooses to ignore the 12000 voices raised in objection to this policy, as she has ignored the best scientific arguments put forward against the changes to burning and hedge cutting seasons. But why ? The leaky and lame argument of the IFA regarding the necessity for hedge cutting as a road safety measure doesn't warrant this legislation, given the existing provisions available to local authorities for dealing with such situations. The only reason I can see for this measure is a politically motivated "cosying up" to an influential element of the farming vote for obvious electoral gain. On the IFA side, the slashing and burning furore might just take minds off the organisation's own management woes for a while!

Capercaillie

Manach wrote: »

I would be against this. It both is yet more encrouchment by the state on property rights and interferes with rural life. The state only cares for whatever it can squeeze from general populace - any verbage pertaining to their stepping in and protecting wildlife by engendering more bureaucratic oversight should be rejected for the reality dissonance that it it.

At the end of day, I have some land set aside to ensure that wildlife is thriving and part of the living ecosystem that is the right thing to do and is part of tradition rural heritage and not imposed by the state or a plethora of NGOs via a click and legislate regime. Governments come and go, the tradition of respect for the countryside being eroded by such action will engender ill will that will last.

You sound like Michael Fitzmaurice TD. "We look after nature in Rural Ireland!". We know how that ends!!!

magicbastarder

the two farmers i've talked to basically shrugged their shoulders at the 'benefit' of being able to cut hedgerows earlier. they said that they've better things to be worrying about during the 'new' window when hedge cutting is to be allowed.

Woodville56

Where is the slash & burn legislation at now with the upcoming dissolution of the Dail? Has it been enacted ??

OpenYourEyes

Hasn't been enacted, so it's essentially dropped now, unless the next government pick it up and start again with it.

Might I suggest that everyone mention it to any politicians canvassing at their door that any support for the heritage bill or any similar bill will severely affect their chances of a vote!

OpenYourEyes

Hasn't been enacted, so it's essentially dropped now, unless the next government pick it up and start again with it.

Might I suggest that everyone mention it to any politicians canvassing at their door that any support for the heritage bill or any similar bill will severely affect their chances of a vote!

Woodville56

OpenYourEyes wrote: »

Hasn't been enacted, so it's essentially dropped now, unless the next government pick it up and start again with it.

Might I suggest that everyone mention it to any politicians canvassing at their door that any support for the heritage bill or any similar bill will severely affect their chances of a vote!

I agree, the campaign to drop this legislation mustn't be postponed or lessened just because of a prospective change of minister or government - the farming lobby will still be there ! Maybe it's wishful thinking but perhaps a more enlightened and heritage focused minister next time ?

magicbastarder

Woodville56 wrote: »

Maybe it's wishful thinking but perhaps a more enlightened and heritage focused minister next time ?

or maybe just anyone enda kenny owes a favour to.

Jayzesake

Woodville56 wrote: »

Maybe it's wishful thinking but perhaps a more enlightened and heritage focused minister next time ?

Difficult to imagine anything worse than the one we've got. (Famous last words?)

Capercaillie

Jayzesake wrote: »

Difficult to imagine anything worse than the one we've got. (Famous last words?)

She is the worst ever, pure vermin. A minister for the Gaeltacht who can't speak Irish..........

Jayzesake

Capercaillie wrote: »

She is the worst ever...

Contrast her absolutely criminal authorisation of the recent cull of Red Deer in Killarney NP with this statement by her predecessor Deenihan, when banning all shooting of female Reds in the 2012/13 hunting season:

“Kerry Red Deer are a unique feature of our heritage. The National Parks and Wildlife Service of my Department has been monitoring red deer in Killarney National Park and has recorded a significant decline in red deer density in recent years. I have, therefore, decided that, in order to conserve the special lineage of red deer in Kerry, to prohibit the hunting of these unique species.”

http://www.ahg.gov.ie/22102012-deeni...deer-in-kerry/

OpenYourEyes

There's a piece in the Sunday Independant today, which I havn't had the chance to read yet, that says Fine Gael will be reviving the Heritage Bill 2016 (anti-heritage bill might be more appropriate?) if they're re-elected. Make sure to let your local politicians know what you think of this, and vote accordingly - and make sure to get friends and family to sign the petition!

Woodville56

I'm really curious as to the IFA fixation with this slash and burn lobbying. Being from a farming background and chatting with farmers on a regular basis, slash & burn doesn't really figure strongly on their radar, most of the ones I know have bigger fish to fry. It seems to me that the slash & burn movement is lead by a certain element within the farming sector- mainly those involved in the more intensive farming and rancher types, together with some in the IFA hierarchy and their political allies who see votes in progressing this agenda . In short, I'm not convinced that this IFA slash & burn agitation has widespread appeal or support among farmers generally, many of whom are very much in tune with their local environment and biodiversity- perhaps I'm wrong or just trying not to paint all farmers with the same slash and burn supporters brush ?

Woodville56

OpenYourEyes wrote: »

There's a piece in the Sunday Independant today, which I havn't had the chance to read yet, that says Fine Gael will be reviving the Heritage Bill 2016 (anti-heritage bill might be more appropriate?) if they're re-elected. Make sure to let your local politicians know what you think of this, and vote accordingly - and make sure to get friends and family to sign the petition!

Agreed, the pressure must be intensified over the course of the election campaign. I'm thinking of emailing all candidates in my constituency asking them for a response indicating their position on this issue. Perhaps nationally some of the environmental protection groups might do similar and publish the outcomes ?

OpenYourEyes

Woodville56 wrote: »

I'm really curious as to the IFA fixation with this slash and burn lobbying. Being from a farming background and chatting with farmers on a regular basis, slash & burn doesn't really figure strongly on their radar, most of the ones I know have bigger fish to fry. It seems to me that the slash & burn movement is lead by a certain element within the farming sector- mainly those involved in the more intensive farming and rancher types, together with some in the IFA hierarchy and their political allies who see votes in progressing this agenda . In short, I'm not convinced that this IFA slash & burn agitation has widespread appeal or support among farmers generally, many of whom are very much in tune with their local environment and biodiversity- perhaps I'm wrong or just trying not to paint all farmers with the same slash and burn supporters brush ?

Perhaps they see it as de-regulation, and that any de-regulation is to be welcomed? Just that they don't like being told what they can and can't do, and when they can and can't do it? The general response from farmers on the ground does seem to be apathy though - these changes won't make a difference to most of them.

Capercaillie

OpenYourEyes wrote: »

Perhaps they see it as de-regulation, and that any de-regulation is to be welcomed? Just that they don't like being told what they can and can't do, and when they can and can't do it? The general response from farmers on the ground does seem to be apathy though - these changes won't make a difference to most of them.

Farmers who burn scrub won't be too bothered about the changes, they will burn In April anyways. Nobody ever gets caught and no one has ever been charged (that I know).