roof your farm roads now

kerry cow

Will we all have to build lagoons like you see on the side of the motorways to contain our run off .will thousands have to be spent on road adjustments .
I have 5 times more road water than slurry .
What the fk

corglass

Context please?

Gawddawggonnit

Roofed roadways and topless cubicles...



'''Tis mad Ted".

Mooooo

Once any roadway runoff isn't going into a watercourse twill be grand.

my3cents

Mooooo wrote: »

Once any roadway runoff isn't going into a watercourse twill be grand.

Our local river goes brown twice a day just after milking so some run off is deliberately dumped into the watercourse.

No one comes out when its actually happening so no one will ever get caught for it but you might all have to pay with improvments because of some chancers.

kerry cow

All run off ends up in the water course .
If you spit it will end up in a water course at some piont

jaymla627

kerry cow wrote: »

Will we all have to build lagoons like you see on the side of the motorways to contain our run off .will thousands have to be spent on road adjustments .
I have 5 times more road water than slurry .
What the fk

Have two different rivers going through the farm and a heap of drains leading up into them, have a good stretch of roadway with drains each side so how do I remedy that, if it's strictly enforced cows will have to go indoors here would cost a fortune if I had to contain road water, the water trough rule is crazy too have some fields where theirs nowhere a trough could be placed that isn't less then 20m from a water source

Buford T. Justice XIX

jaymla627 wrote: »

Have two different rivers going through the farm and a heap of drains leading up into them, have a good stretch of roadway with drains each side so how do I remedy that, if it's strictly enforced cows will have to go indoors here would cost a fortune if I had to contain road water, the water trough rule is crazy too have some fields where theirs nowhere a trough could be placed that isn't less then 20m from a water source

A camber on the road to divert the runoff to the other side or a small bank to stop the runoff and divert it to a non water source area.

Afaik, these aren't agreed as yet so there will be plenty of change before it is implemented.

kerry cow

Another classic example of some twap in a office who has all these bright idea but never stood on a hill farm on a day with the sky milling down and water running in every direction .
It's all a bit too much at this stage for me .
The stress that farmers are under these times is unbelievable .
It's all about the environment and animal health .
What about the farmers health and well been????
You'd sometimes feel like take your bfp and shove it your know where .the bfp penalty is the stick .
Common sense exists no more .
There's always a new rules that has to be more complex that the previous .
There must be a big office somewhere , where all these boys and girls sit and think tank all day .
I am sick to the teeth of it all .

mf240

kerry cow wrote: »

Another classic example of some twap in a office who has all these bright idea but never stood on a hill farm on a day with the sky milling down and water running in every direction .
It's all a bit too much at this stage for me .
The stress that farmers are under these times is unbelievable .
It's all about the environment and animal health .
What about the farmers health and well been????
You'd sometimes feel like take your bfp and shove it your know where .the bfp penalty is the stick .
Common sense exists no more .
There's always a new rules that has to be more complex that the previous .
There must be a big office somewhere , where all these boys and girls sit and think tank all day .
I am sick to the teeth of it all .

Don't worry about it. It might never happen

mf240

my3cents wrote: »

Our local river goes brown twice a day just after milking so some run off is deliberately dumped into the watercourse.

No one comes out when its actually happening so no one will ever get caught for it but you might all have to pay with improvments because of some chancers.

Well that's no right either. If that's really happening then it's not representitve of most farmers.

jaymla627

Anyone know if the 250kgs/ha derogation has even got renewal yet, seen noting about it lately our even a mention in the press

Sam Kade

kerry cow wrote: »

Another classic example of some twap in a office who has all these bright idea but never stood on a hill farm on a day with the sky milling down and water running in every direction .
It's all a bit too much at this stage for me .
The stress that farmers are under these times is unbelievable .
It's all about the environment and animal health .
What about the farmers health and well been????
You'd sometimes feel like take your bfp and shove it your know where .the bfp penalty is the stick .
Common sense exists no more .
There's always a new rules that has to be more complex that the previous .
There must be a big office somewhere , where all these boys and girls sit and think tank all day .
I am sick to the teeth of it all .

It's a bit of a contradiction they want you to keep water on the road and when the cows get lame from it they'll say your animal welfare isn't up to scratch.

GrasstoMilk

jaymla627 wrote: »

Anyone know if the 250kgs/ha derogation has even got renewal yet, seen noting about it lately our even a mention in the press

I get the impression jay that you would love if it wasn't renewed?

freedominacup

jaymla627 wrote: »

have a good stretch of roadway with drains each side so how do I remedy that

Without knowing the lie of your land. A small to very small wetlands at the end of the drains beside that stretch of roadway would probably sort the problem. Let the tax man pay for it.

kowtow

I still like the roofing idea what ever anybody says.

Combine it with on/off grazing and t'will be like a giant grant aided bus shelter for the cows.

I'm going to get Dalata to advertise on mine.

archer22

mf240 wrote: »

Well that's no right either. If that's really happening then it's not representitve of most farmers.

Might not be representative of most farmers...but there are plenty at it.A cnut in this area lets slurry run into a local stream all year round...so bad that other farmers downstream have fenced off their cattle from the watercourse.
Its been going on for about 30 years now

GrasstoMilk

archer22 wrote: »

Might not be representative of most farmers...but there are plenty at it.A cnut in this area lets slurry run into a local stream all year round...so bad that other farmers downstream have fenced off their cattle from the watercourse.
Its been going on for about 30 years now

Well then report him to the council. If it was happening in my area I wouldn't think twice about letting them know and I'm a farmer

archer22

GrasstoMilk wrote: »

Well then report him to the council. If it was happening in my area I wouldn't think twice about letting them know and I'm a farmer

Problem is if you report the first thing they want is your name and address, supposedly in case they "need to contact you".I reality what happens is they tell Pat Slurryman that so and so has made a complaint about him.
Nobody wants a local war with a neighbour.
I can't understand why the likes of the EPA don't walk all the watercourses and find those things themselves.
Can't understand why those agencies doing farm inspections don't find those things either
In case I mentioned it couldn't be more obvious unless it had neon lights flashing over it.

Mooooo

Small river running thru our farm, water is tested regular where it joins with another a couple of miles away, assumed that was common enough. Shock horror they don't test after the next village down along where council are responsible for sewage.....

my3cents

Mooooo wrote: »

Small river running thru our farm, water is tested regular where it joins with another a couple of miles away, assumed that was common enough. Shock horror they don't test after the next village down along where council are responsible for sewage.....

The river I'm talking about is tested regularly and someone from the council (for the EPA) has been out to test after slurry was dumped in the river and also after milk was dumped in the river.

The problem is that they come out days later long after the problem is gone.

If I take samples even in sterile containers (supplied by the EPA) the testers just say "can't trust that" and throw it away and send someone out a week later in the middle of the day when the water is running clear.

divillybit

https://amp.independent.ie/business/farming/forestry-enviro/new-data-to-be-used-to-target-farms-polluting-rivers-and-lakes-35490144.html

It'll just be a matter of time before persistant farmyard polluters are caught, and it'll be sooner rather than later

Floki

my3cents wrote: »

The river I'm talking about is tested regularly and someone from the council (for the EPA) has been out to test after slurry was dumped in the river and also after milk was dumped in the river.

The problem is that they come out days later long after the problem is gone.

If I take samples even in sterile containers (supplied by the EPA) the testers just say "can't trust that" and throw it away and send someone out a week later in the middle of the day when the water is running clear.

If this is not a wind up that farmer is mentally challenged.

The greatest day on the farm here was when we moved from a tie up byre to a milking parlour complete with slatted tank for dairy washings. The dairy washings are the best fertilizer that I have on the farm.

kerry cow

I am going to buy a few of them horse nappies the killarney boys have on them jaunting cars .
May be the healy raes might be able to get the DOA to grant aid them .

my3cents

Floki wrote: »

If this is not a wind up that farmer is mentally challenged.

The greatest day on the farm here was when we moved from a tie up byre to a milking parlour complete with slatted tank for dairy washings. The dairy washings are the best fertilizer that I have on the farm.

All I know is that if I'm down at the river early in the morning then it goes from almost crystal clear to having a cloudy brown haze to it and that goes on for about half an hour the same happens every evening.

Add to that I've also watched as the river went white with milk one Sunday afternoon and stayed that way for half an hour before it started to clear up and run clear again. I've also seen traces of milk dumped in the river but only once watched it from start to finish.

I regularly see the EPA tester (about 3 times a year they test near the house) and when they test the river is really clean, good Oxygen levels and very low E-coli. If its raining and there is a lot of run off then they don't test because that won't give an "average" result.

Floki

my3cents wrote: »

All I know is that if I'm down at the river early in the morning then it goes from almost crystal clear to having a cloudy brown haze to it and that goes on for about half an hour the same happens every evening.

Add to that I've also watched as the river went white with milk one Sunday afternoon and stayed that way for half an hour before it started to clear up and run clear again. I've also seen traces of milk dumped in the river but only once watched it from start to finish.

I regularly see the EPA tester (about 3 times a year they test near the house) and when they test the river is really clean, good Oxygen levels and very low E-coli. If its raining and there is a lot of run off then they don't test because that won't give an "average" result.

From what you're saying I'm surprised there hasn't been fish kills.

Usually the council or epa would be very proactive on this. Sounds like he/she doesn't have a collection tank, which would be an immediate fail on any inspection.
All I can say is if it happens again film it and bring the footage to your county council water services officer.

Edit: nothing to do with this but there's sensors on rivers and lakes all over the country on a website. Forget the name of it but it measures the water level and the conductivity. My local one in enniscorthy you can see the big jump in conductivity when they release sewage around 8 pm.

Base price

Floki wrote: »

From what you're saying I'm surprised there hasn't been fish kills.

Usually the council or epa would be very proactive on this. Sounds like he/she doesn't have a collection tank, which would be an immediate fail on any inspection.
All I can say is if it happens again film it and bring the footage to your county council water services officer.

Edit: nothing to do with this but there's sensors on rivers and lakes all over the country on a website. Forget the name of it but it measures the water level and the conductivity. My local one in enniscorthy you can see the big jump in conductivity when they release sewage around 8 pm.

Is this it
http://www.gov.ie/services/access-hydrometric-data/

Base price

Here ye go:
http://waterlevel.ie/

Floki

Base price wrote: »

Here ye go:
http://waterlevel.ie/

That was a real hard website name to remember. :rolleyes:

Birdnuts

freedominacup wrote: »

Without knowing the lie of your land. A small to very small wetlands at the end of the drains beside that stretch of roadway would probably sort the problem. Let the tax man pay for it.

That would be the sensible approach to such issues and such wetlands should be supported on all farms via GLAS etc. But given the record of the Dept on such issues, its probably a forlorn hope, indeed you'll probably get some dope from DAFM telling you to fill in or drain such a wetland:rolleyes:

Birdnuts

Floki wrote: »

From what you're saying I'm surprised there hasn't been fish kills.

Usually the council or epa would be very proactive on this. Sounds like he/she doesn't have a collection tank, which would be an immediate fail on any inspection.
All I can say is if it happens again film it and bring the footage to your county council water services officer.

Edit: nothing to do with this but there's sensors on rivers and lakes all over the country on a website. Forget the name of it but it measures the water level and the conductivity. My local one in enniscorthy you can see the big jump in conductivity when they release sewage around 8 pm.

There used to be a lot of this carry on in the 80's with a huge attendant rise in fish kills and many folks wells becoming unusable. Thankfully the vast majority of farmers engaged with new regulations etc. and cleaned up their act. Of course it only takes one clown to ruin it for everyone else which is why farming is now so regulated. On that note I'd say the next element for regulation will be the likes of spray use like MCPA which apparently is now starting to turn up in water samples over large parts of the country. Of course if the product was used correctly this would not be happening, but again its a small number of chancers that will get everyone stung:mad:

tractorporn

Birdnuts wrote:

Of course if the product was used correctly this would not be happening, but again its a small number of chancers that will get everyone stung

Don't 100% agree with you there. Some of it is down to messers but round here a DAFM inspector during the wet summers of 12 & 13 gave out 15% penalties for not controlling rushes because the land was too wet to top.

When asked what could they do the inspector say that the rushes should have been sprayed, even though ground conditions were not suitable for topping. When pushed about the land not being in a fit state for spraying he told farmers that it didn't matter about ground conditions the rush had to be controlled.

So now we have guys round here who spray religiously once a year regardless of conditions out of pure fear of a BPS penalty. I realise lads still should adhere to the rules on spraying but a dept representative should not be inducing fear into the equation either.

freedominacup

Birdnuts wrote: »

That would be the sensible approach to such issues and such wetlands should be supported on all farms via GLAS etc. But given the record of the Dept on such issues, its probably a forlorn hope, indeed you'll probably get some dope from DAFM telling you to fill in or drain such a wetland:rolleyes:

Integrated wetlands are fairly well accepted as a control for dirty water. Council in Waterford use them quite a bit for small sewage schemes. Google Anne valley walk. Council have an wetland 50 metres or less from the car park at the start of the walk. No issues.

Mooooo

freedominacup wrote: »

Integrated wetlands are fairly well accepted as a control for dirty water. Council in Waterford use them quite a bit for small sewage schemes. Google Anne valley walk. Council have an wetland 50 metres or less from the car park at the start of the walk. No issues.

Are they reedbed type setups? Neighbour installed one for dirty water as land topography suited but has been told since not to use it..

freedominacup

Mooooo wrote: »

Are they reedbed type setups? Neighbour installed one for dirty water as land topography suited but has been told since not to use it..

Yes reed beds are part of the setup. In use around here since early-mid nineties. Often have fish in last pond as a kind of canary in the coal mine job.

yosemitesam1

Anyone know if the 250kgs/ha derogation has even got renewal yet, seen noting about it lately our even a mention in the press


I think these measures are in order to justify the derogation being renewed. They must know that maintaining the status quo won't be excepted by the EU.
All of the measures on the independents website talk of farms stocked over 170.

http://www.housing.gov.ie/sites/default/files/publications/files/2017-09-08_nap_expert_group_report_-_final_for_publication.pdf

Birdnuts

tractorporn wrote: »

Don't 100% agree with you there. Some of it is down to messers but round here a DAFM inspector during the wet summers of 12 & 13 gave out 15% penalties for not controlling rushes because the land was too wet to top.

When asked what could they do the inspector say that the rushes should have been sprayed, even though ground conditions were not suitable for topping. When pushed about the land not being in a fit state for spraying he told farmers that it didn't matter about ground conditions the rush had to be controlled.

So now we have guys round here who spray religiously once a year regardless of conditions out of pure fear of a BPS penalty. I realise lads still should adhere to the rules on spraying but a dept representative should not be inducing fear into the equation either.

That doesn't surprise me - DAFM have a lot to answer for when it comes to illogical and destructive farming practices in this country

Waffletraktor

tractorporn wrote: »

Don't 100% agree with you there. Some of it is down to messers but round here a DAFM inspector during the wet summers of 12 & 13 gave out 15% penalties for not controlling rushes because the land was too wet to top.

When asked what could they do the inspector say that the rushes should have been sprayed, even though ground conditions were not suitable for topping. When pushed about the land not being in a fit state for spraying he told farmers that it didn't matter about ground conditions the rush had to be controlled.

So now we have guys round here who spray religiously once a year regardless of conditions out of pure fear of a BPS penalty. I realise lads still should adhere to the rules on spraying but a dept representative should not be inducing fear into the equation either.

If you had a decent farm representative organisation i would have them drag this jobs worth in for an apeall in front of their bosses. Then i would bring out the depts man at Backweston who's over licencing chems in Ireland to tear them a new one.

Gawddawggonnit

yosemitesam1 wrote: »

Anyone know if the 250kgs/ha derogation has even got renewal yet, seen noting about it lately our even a mention in the press


I think these measures are in order to justify the derogation being renewed. They must know that maintaining the status quo won't be excepted by the EU.
All of the measures on the independents website talk of farms stocked over 170.

http://www.housing.gov.ie/sites/default/files/publications/files/2017-09-08_nap_expert_group_report_-_final_for_publication.pdf

I was wondering how this thread would develop and you're on the ball Sam. Fair dues.

I've these restrictions to deal with here for years. Firstly I'd have to apply for planning permission to build a road. Then there must be a drain both sides of the road. If those drains don't flow into the public road drainage system then the runoff must go into a reed bed filtration system. These beds are not expensive!

It matters not one jot if an animal never walks on that road because it must also cater for oil, chemical spills etc. and rightly so!

I fully agree with these proposals.

Gawddawggonnit

Waffletraktor wrote: »

If you had a decent farm representative organisation i would have them drag this jobs worth in for an apeall in front of their bosses. Then i would bring out the depts man at Backweston who's over licencing chems in Ireland to tear them a new one.

It's a bit daft that Atrazine, Isoproturon etc are banned in Ireland as there was never a chance of them entering the water table with such low use.

Gobshytes of civil servants trying to make a name for themselves...

kerry cow

If I walk my cows on the public road instead will the council collect the dirty water .

Keepgrowing

kerry cow wrote: »

If I walk my cows on the public road instead will the council collect the dirty water .

They're not talking about collecting dirty water off cow roads rather not allowing it flow directly into water courses. I think it's a reasonable compromise to keep our N derogation.

Ah and yes they'll collect the water but you'll clean the road

kerry cow

So if it flows into the grass and then in to the drain , what's the story

Karangue

They will have to start wearing nappies like the jarvey horses.

kowtow

Gawddawggonnit wrote: »

If those drains don't flow into the public road drainage system then the runoff must go into a reed bed filtration system. These beds are not expensive!

If a rush bed filtration system was up to the job Ireland would have the cleanest water in the world.

Sam Kade

Birdnuts wrote: »

There used to be a lot of this carry on in the 80's with a huge attendant rise in fish kills and many folks wells becoming unusable. Thankfully the vast majority of farmers engaged with new regulations etc. and cleaned up their act. Of course it only takes one clown to ruin it for everyone else which is why farming is now so regulated. On that note I'd say the next element for regulation will be the likes of spray use like MCPA which apparently is now starting to turn up in water samples over large parts of the country. Of course if the product was used correctly this would not be happening, but again its a small number of chancers that will get everyone stung:mad:

Plenty councils pumping waste directly into rivers. I can't say if they still do it, maybe they cleaned up their act since.

freedominacup

kowtow wrote: »

If a rush bed filtration system was up to the job Ireland would have the cleanest water in the world.

They probably don't work in some soil types but they do work. On that walk I mentioned there's an angling club who manage the waterway and have a number of fishing ponds along the walk stocked with pike and trout. If the wetlands on the farms bounding the walk and the councils own wetlands weren't working I doubt these fish would survive.