EU Biodiversity strategy 2030

Water John

Legally IWT the carbon sequestered is yours to trade. Can't see the Irish govn't winning that case. Our farming orgs are too busy fighting the wrong battles as usual, no vision.

Thought the guy from Wicklow, interviewed by Ella on ETTG last night was very balanced. worth viewing again on Sunday 1.10 pm or on player.

Nature Restoration at the Env and Climate action Committee

https://twitter.com/OireachtasNews/status/1640657736198135809?s=20

https://twitter.com/Independent_ie/status/1640839934696210433?t=YaXvWZgpDQZiR1fg9u4RRg&s=19

...

Jonnyc135

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120413115#Comment_120413115

Same old same old again, environmentalists and green politicians lying to our faces saying that this rewetting does involves raising the water table and farming can still be carried out - much like the DG of Enviro in the EU was spouting

They really must think us people are absolutely stupid.

Vincent Roddy brought up great points about the designations and land value afterwards - this really needs more attention as once this land is designated as rewet in the LULUCF it will be worthless €0/acre as it will have no value and any of the carbon stored according to the Carbon Farming Proposal going through the EU at the minute wont be linked to it, so this land will track no commodity either - least forestry land price will ultimately track the commercial commodity price of timber.

There are loads of people around that have extremely high quality land on peat soil, that are high index very fertile and dry, and the average land price would fetch them €12,000/acre, if they are forced to rewet this land price is now €0/acre. Banking wise, if this farmer has spent a lot of money on dairy equipment/capital expenditure and borrowed against the land valued at average land price at the time 6000-12000/acre, and this forced rewetting happens and this land is worthless, not alone is the farmer bankrupt basically (as liabilities will outweigh his asset value which has being decimated with a designation), but the banks collateral (Land put up) is also now worthless too so they are sitting on a loss as well.

My faith in politicians and the European Union is on the floor, in terms of trust and respect for these people and organizations - I'm done with them.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120418364#Comment_120418364

Tell me about it. I believe there are practices livestock farmers (including me) can utilise to minimise poaching that they aren't currently doing but when the water table is raised you're finished. Raising the water table is wordplay and as you allude to, insulting. The much vaunted Paludiculture isn't a real alternative.

Thing is, what are the people who will be affected by this doing for themselves? This thread is worryingly quiet as if posters only believe this sh1t will affect people on the hills.

The problem with designations et al is, as said at the hearing, it's preservation not conservation. Computer will say no to new business idea's a land owner has. Personally I do not accept that it's enough that one is simply "paid" for designations - even though I'm unpaid for them at the moment. Post designation I can have a financially viable idea for new business, possibly even create new employment and computer will say no.

They're using science to back up an agenda, rewetting. It is the God above all and must not be questioned. It was interesting during the hearing to listen carefully to some of the politicians who in reality had just one question - What will it take for you to accept what we want to do to you regardless of your arguments.

I think, and apologies if I'm mistaken as it was late when I watched it, only Darren O'Rourke asked for other solutions. I think there ARE other scientific solutions, which is why I'm 100% against forced rewetting, but no one is bringing them up nor listening to them.

Jonnyc135

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120418740#Comment_120418740

You are dead right so many farmers out there don't think it will have any affect on them.

To put this into context, below is a Map from the EPA outlining the soil types in Ireland. Anything in Dark Grey, Basically all the western seaboard is classed as peat soil under the EPA and Government, so under this bullshit anybody who own land in those areas are f@@ked. This map shows the scale of what these greenies in the EU and our politicians are facilitating them too do - destroy all the areas in dark grey both social and economically.

youllbemine

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120418876#Comment_120418876

Interesting map, just one question which may seem silly. I understand how rewetting can work on reclaimed peat lowland. It is fairly simple, you just block drains and let the water table increase.

But how can you rewet the slopes of west Cavan and the likes where you have steep land that is as wet as it can be. Blocking up drains won’t cause the land to get any wetter I don’t think.

You had a mass exodus from this type of land 30/40 years ago thanks to land being bought for forestry but the redesignatoion of this land as non-farmable to “protect the environment” will really finish off anyone who is making a living from the land in these areas of Leitrim and West Cavan. I know some lads who would say that’s the place for the trees and to hell with the people there but they don’t realise it could actually be them who’s out of pocket or out on their ear. Keep up the posting on this thread please, very interesting.

Jonnyc135

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120419016#Comment_120419016

Your dead right it is next to impossible rewet land in that type of a scenario - Try tell that to the DG Environment in the EU or any of these environmentalists - they wont believe you and will think your a clown who knows nothing.

There's no talking to these people.

I wrote a few decent well written letters to editor for the farmers journal about this EU Biodiversity 2030 regulation - always get a reply saying they'll include it in a future publication but never yet seen anything published.

Would wonder what the IFJ are at really and why there is such little debate or communication on this because it is really the single most important issue - CAP and TAMS applications are small fry in comparison to this.

Say my name

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120419097#Comment_120419097

Just my opinion. I think the lead from the IFJ on environment talks is lacking principle and is prepared to throw anyone under the bus as long as it doesn't affect themselves personally. If I'm correct it's a southeast tillage farmer of hundreds of acres.

I recall Tim Lombard questioning Director Rosa in a past Ag committee whether people could believe in the European "project" with all of this, he was right to do so.

Michael Fitz drawing similar lines in the recent confidence vote in the Gubberment.

https://fb.watch/jBjmLHSo0G/

The impact of designations and bureaucracy on local food production. I don't know the person in question but the decision is ridiculous imo.

https://connachttribune.ie/an-bord-pleanala-issues-refusal-for-former-mad-yolk-farm-lands/?fbclid=IwAR2s9TPhxmGDE1I2QoIzERzYYLI4uDMK1u_AVgBacyrnWnZM2AktFDuSJIA

alps

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120434008#Comment_120434008

This part of the world doesn't know what hinger is.

Lime Tree Farm

A stand out statement, that made me sit up and take note.

"The construction of a track with a track machine had a significant "adverse" effect on the integrity of a European site, Mr Rice said"

https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/courtandcrime/arid-41109250.html

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120442359#Comment_120442359

Meh, European but advocated for and overseen by Irish agendas. The drama.

Water John

The Irish Citizens Assembly Report on Biodiversity has been published.

Jonnyc135

5 articles in agriland all about bio diversity loss from the citizens assembly and countless environmental bodies.

Serious agenda by mainstream media pushing this, no doubt there is bio diversity loss and it can be helped through alot of good measures - but destroying the socio economic fabric of rural Ireland by rewetting peat soils is not the answer.

Jonnyc135

Peter Sweetman taking 2 dairy farms to An Bord Planeala over planning for infrastructure on their farm.

Was at a planning and law conference a few months back and this guy has some amount of objections made. Basically they will try like what the did for that cheese plant and say that the upstream emmisions of the dairy cattle must be included in the environmental impact assessment prior to building the plant.

I bet this is the same carry on he is trying here but he may have a better chance getting this on through as it is at a farm level. All depends on ABP decision but feck all farmers out there will have the fiancial power to bring this to a high court decision after a negative ABP decision.

I'd watch this closely, precedence only has to be ever set once.

..

https://twitter.com/peatyGHG/status/1645721057662255104?s=20

Jonnyc135

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120467185#Comment_120467185

Great to see, yet all the environmentalists and politicians were saying in that last oireachtas meeting that the science is clear and their peer reviewed and were basically laughing at Vincent Roddy when he said diddnt agree with their science based off European models and data.

Hopefully this irish data shows them up for what they are - green cult agenda clowns

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120467185#Comment_120467185

Still comes to the same conclusion on rewetting and restoration

Since peatlands cover around 20 % of the land area in the Republic of Ireland, their management is of particular significance in reducing national greenhouse gases (GHG) emissions. We reviewed peatland carbon (C) flux studies within Ireland, extracting data for carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide fluxes, as well as fluvial losses and here propose preliminary country-specific emission factors (EFs) for various peatland land uses and management practices. Using our derived EFs and latest areal estimates, national emissions from peatlands (excluding horticulture and combustion) amount to 2.3 Mt C y-¹ (± 0.9–3.7 Mt C y-¹), with half of all peatland GHG emissions coming from grasslands on organic soils and nearly one-third from domestic extraction drained peatlands. Our analyses suggest that peatland management through rewetting and restoration has the potential to substantially reduce emissions from drained peatlands, and this paper attempts to quantify this reduction. This is critically important given the large areas of degraded peatlands that have been earmarked for rewetting in the next decade.

https://twitter.com/AitovaInNature/status/1644271830981648384?t=9PSoRTmXMBD4PDP72q0vPw&s=19

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120467205#Comment_120467205

We'll see what the new numbers say, I've heard one's which are very encouraging. The greater the reduction the more possibility an argument can succeed against rewetting. Unfortunately, from my pov at least, still no one is talking about alternatives. Figures (the people kind) must be presented with a viable alternative argument that has more meat on it's bones than a DUP style "No!", I hope I'm wrong but I don't see that one working.

Jonnyc135

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120467597#Comment_120467597

Once people start to realize how drastically this rewetting will affect them, their communities and their pockets both revenue and asset value - There will be huge push back and a common ground will have to be obtained. Going in with the approach like 'oh this is a law now and were taking over your asset, devaluing it and rewetting it end of' will be an absolute disaster and could easily cause the collapse of a government and deep down I think and hope they know this.

Hard Knocks

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120467859#Comment_120467859

Hearing this is also on the cards in NI. In a time of world beef and dairy shortages due to drought in other countries the whole of Ireland is only going to reduce the national herd and rewet peat areas. Passing the buck and not good enough

Got to talk to David Johnson and Hui Chen Su of Johnson-Su Bioreactor fame today. I even got a private audience 😁

Outlined the situation regarding alleged peatland emissions, farming, and the religion of rewetting.

I asked if they thought the emissions could be captured by placing a beneficial blanket of aerobic microbes in the upper layer of drained peatland. The answer is a solid yes, along with the correct grazing management afterwards.

Say my name

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120529644#Comment_120529644

Now go on twitter and raise Hell!! 😎

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120529805#Comment_120529805

Haven't a notion. It's a viable alternative to rewetting and no one is interested in it. I'm just stating that it exists.

Say my name

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120529828#Comment_120529828

The Irish env researchers will just say they're further investigating emissions from peat farmland and while there's a reduction in emissions from earlier studies the research still says there's emissions.

No body is interested because they don't know if diverse biology applied in the aerobic layer above the anaerobic will stop emissions or even reverse and become a sink.

If you're serious you're going to have to contact someone.

SETU research maybe.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120529989#Comment_120529989

It's a serious theory based on comments by Elaine Ingham mostly in the SFW course. Asking David Johnson and Hui Chen Su today was just confirming what I already knew. Ingham has alluded to having the/a solution to GHG emissions from melting permafrost. I went and looked at what kind of soils make up permafrost lands, a large % are peatlands. One of the composting methods is via static pile, where the innards of the pile go anaerobic, producing GHG gasses. I questioned why one would want to add those to the atmosphere, the reply was seeing as there's an aerobic layer, a blanket if you will,around the outside of the pile in contact with outside air, the aerobic microbes intercept and change the GHG's before they can escape the pile. Now swing back to alleged emissions on Irish drained peatland and you can join the dots. Probably the most difficult part of the puzzle is keeping the grazing correct after the fact, which is likely even more important. But, the moral of the story is it's an alternative that politically robs the fundamentalists of their argument, gives everyone a healthy environment and reduces the farmers costs.

I tried and failed to bring a lobby group rep with me today, because I see what's happening in Oireachtas committee's, and hear other stuff in meetings. I think not presenting an alternative which a politician can use as political cover is rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

Jonnyc135

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120530110#Comment_120530110

From my limited knowledge of microbes/microbial life in soil, I was of the opinion that the soil pH have to be roughly above 6 for them to be able to live, survive and carry out the aerobic blanket at maximum efficiency as you described. If that is the case then alot of well managed drained peat soils that are limed sufficiently are not carbon emitters as the EPA and their so called coefficients calculated from mainland Europe would suggest.

Very interesting all the same, I am a firm believer that high fertilie soils rich with microbial life and fungi are not getting enough attention as they are one of the most important parts of farming - try tell that to a vegan who eats Beyond Meat products grown in America in soils saturated in pesticides and synthetic nitrogen with 0 microbial or fungi life in the soil.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120535246#Comment_120535246

I'm not an expert, I know enough to be dangerous, but I have asked experts in-depth questions specifying fairly precisely the type of land involved, PH was never flagged as an issue. As an aside, plants in a properly functioning system can create different PH zones along their root systems tailored to their own needs. Ingham in particular would be strongly against lime, gypsum etc. as harmful to soil biology.

Their answers to my questions have been fairly solid yes', once the correct biology is put into place and following that the correct management to look after the biology. As someone, Einstein?, said we won't get out of this with the same thinking that got us into it.

I'm fairly aggravated I couldn't get someone - people who are talking to the politicians - to go along with me on the day, it would have been productive.