Turf Cutting Ban

ChurchStreet · 17-10-2010 04:20PM #1

Hello,
I'm going to be affected by the Turf Cutting Ban next year. The dept of the envirnoment says that it is the result of the EU habitat directive, of which Ireland has a ten year derogation. So basically it will be illegal to cut turf on my half acre plot of bog after next year. I inherited the plot of bog from my uncle some 30 years ago and I have come into possession of the purchase agreement made between him and the Land Commission (early fitities) for which he paid £20 in old money. I would view the Turbary rights as an asset, as it provides fuel to heat my home each winter and the dept (albeit under the EU direction) is taking this asset away from me, at the stroke of a pen. The compensation scheme is now closed, which I understand was dirisory by all accounts. I understood from John Gormley that his department would be making contact with affected owners (Turbary ownership in my case, I dont own the land underneath it) but to date I have nothing. I must state that I was not aware to the compensation scheme until it closed. Does anybody think that it is unconstitutional to take these rights away from peolpe without being adequately compensated i.e by money or plots in lieu?

PS: I dont think its help that the whole debate turns into a "Greens" versus the "country peolpe", or becomes personalised.

5live · 17-10-2010 06:36PM

You may be right that it isnt fair but then again life isnt fair either. After a while you get a bit immune to the decrees that eminate from upon high because apparently down here in the stix and muddy byways of 'life beyond the pale' we hardly exist other than as statistics on a computer screen. And as for not opening a green v rural debate (as you termed it), it hasnt closed in the last 3 years. Not wishing to enter into a polemic about the green party(ok so i lied), it is gauling for me personally and probably for a lot of posters on this section to have misguided policies enforced from above with little or no recognition for your rights or beliefs. Which leads me back right to your OP.:D. Isnt life just bloody hilarious

Chinasea · 17-10-2010 06:52PM

Shame we couldn't could work out for ourselves that our over fishing was unsustainable, that our carbon monoxide emissions were out of control, that our land filling of 100% recyclable materials had to be pointed out to us by the EU, that the water and the river and lakes that I drink from is not for my noxious farm waste to be dumped into and that the bog that I inherited will too never be renewed but hey, my house shall be warm and My name is Alright Jack.

johngalway · 17-10-2010 06:54PM

ChurchStreet wrote: »

I must state that I was not aware to the compensation scheme until it closed. Does anybody think that it is unconstitutional to take these rights away from peolpe without being adequately compensated i.e by money or plots in lieu?

This isn't Gospel by a long shot, but, I think you'd get told there was a compensation scheme in place, and that you missed out is your own fault through lack of awareness.

If you feel that strongly about it maybe take some legal advice on the matter. I don't agree with the ban either by the by.

reilig · 17-10-2010 07:01PM

Wasn't the compensation scheme only for those who have already been notified that they can no longer cut on their bog? I understood that if you are notified that you can no longer cut on your bog in the future then you will be able to apply to a newer compensation scheme that will be put in place for newer bogs that have turf cutting bans.

There was a great documentary on tg4 a few weeks back. I put a link to it up here. Google, you might find it. It gave a great view of both sides of the argument - the farmer side definitely won.

I don't agree with the ban either - maybe we'll have an election before it comes into law and it won't go ahead.

johngalway · 17-10-2010 07:10PM

reilig wrote: »

There was a great documentary on tg4 a few weeks back. I put a link to it up here. Google, you might find it. It gave a great view of both sides of the argument - the farmer side definitely won.

This it?

5live · 17-10-2010 07:10PM

Chinasea wrote: »

Shame we couldn't could work out for ourselves that our over fishing was unsustainable, that our carbon monoxide emissions were out of control, that our land filling of 100% recyclable materials had to be pointed out to us by the EU, that the water and the river and lakes that I drink from is not for my noxious farm waste to be dumped into and that the bog that I inherited will too never be renewed but hey, my house shall be warm and My name is Alright Jack.

I think it is carbon dioxide emissions you are referring to? And agricultural manures are not waste but were always recycled back onto the land they were taken from, admittedly at times not in the most appropriate way and not at all by a very small minority. As for the recycling( or lack thereof), that was just pure stupidity. And the problems with some pollution of waterways by farmers i cannot condone but the countless BILLIONS spent by farmers both with and without grant schemes show the desire of the agricultural community to protect the environment in which we live(not view from afar). And dearest chinasea where does your waste products travel once you flush yuor dual flush receptacle? Solids filtered out and quite a lot of the rest ending up, much diluted, in the very waterways that you are accusing us of polluting, as can be gleaned from EPA reports. Is this do as i say or do as i do?:mad:

Birdnuts · 17-10-2010 08:11PM

ChurchStreet wrote: »

Hello,
I'm going to be affected by the Turf Cutting Ban next year. The dept of the envirnoment says that it is the result of the EU habitat directive, of which Ireland has a ten year derogation. So basically it will be illegal to cut turf on my half acre plot of bog after next year. I inherited the plot of bog from my uncle some 30 years ago and I have come into possession of the purchase agreement made between him and the Land Commission (early fitities) for which he paid £20 in old money. I would view the Turbary rights as an asset, as it provides fuel to heat my home each winter and the dept (albeit under the EU direction) is taking this asset away from me, at the stroke of a pen. The compensation scheme is now closed, which I understand was dirisory by all accounts. I understood from John Gormley that his department would be making contact with affected owners (Turbary ownership in my case, I dont own the land underneath it) but to date I have nothing. I must state that I was not aware to the compensation scheme until it closed. Does anybody think that it is unconstitutional to take these rights away from peolpe without being adequately compensated i.e by money or plots in lieu?

PS: I dont think its help that the whole debate turns into a "Greens" versus the "country peolpe", or becomes personalised.

AFAIK the averge compensation was 10K - I'm not sure how it varied with the size of bog though it was claimed that it would be enough to purchase a replacement plot.

PS: I'm puzzled as to why you have not received or are aware of the compensation - perhaps a chat with the relevant authority would clear this up:)

Chinasea · 18-10-2010 07:19AM

5live wrote: »

I think it is carbon dioxide emissions you are referring to? And agricultural manures are not waste but were always recycled back onto the land they were taken from, admittedly at times not in the most appropriate way and not at all by a very small minority. As for the recycling( or lack thereof), that was just pure stupidity. And the problems with some pollution of waterways by farmers i cannot condone but the countless BILLIONS spent by farmers both with and without grant schemes show the desire of the agricultural community to protect the environment in which we live(not view from afar). And dearest chinasea where does your waste products travel once you flush yuor dual flush receptacle? Solids filtered out and quite a lot of the rest ending up, much diluted, in the very waterways that you are accusing us of polluting, as can be gleaned from EPA reports. Is this do as i say or do as i do?:mad:

Shame you missed the point

reilig · 18-10-2010 08:40AM

Chinasea wrote: »

Shame you missed the point

What was the point?? I appear to have missed it too.

5live · 18-10-2010 08:43AM

Chinasea wrote: »

Shame you missed the point

Please clarify the point i missed as i appear to have covered most of your assertions:)

Chinasea · 18-10-2010 05:35PM

reilig wrote: »

What was the point?? I appear to have missed it too.

We have to be told what is obvious, and penalties have to be enforced by the EU as our unsustainable way of living in this country is a disgrace, and sadly as so many "don't get the point" the only way to get the point is with levies or taxes. Water charges are on the way etc., and again, never mind the charges, it is this wasting of water/natural resources both domestically and commercially with this insular attitude of not seeing the bigger picture is one of the major problems in this country.

haybob · 18-10-2010 06:51PM

I think turf cutting is part of our culture and no one seems to be poiting that out

ChurchStreet wrote: »

Hello,
I'm going to be affected by the Turf Cutting Ban next year. The dept of the envirnoment says that it is the result of the EU habitat directive, of which Ireland has a ten year derogation. So basically it will be illegal to cut turf on my half acre plot of bog after next year. I inherited the plot of bog from my uncle some 30 years ago and I have come into possession of the purchase agreement made between him and the Land Commission (early fitities) for which he paid £20 in old money. I would view the Turbary rights as an asset, as it provides fuel to heat my home each winter and the dept (albeit under the EU direction) is taking this asset away from me, at the stroke of a pen. The compensation scheme is now closed, which I understand was dirisory by all accounts. I understood from John Gormley that his department would be making contact with affected owners (Turbary ownership in my case, I dont own the land underneath it) but to date I have nothing. I must state that I was not aware to the compensation scheme until it closed. Does anybody think that it is unconstitutional to take these rights away from peolpe without being adequately compensated i.e by money or plots in lieu?

PS: I dont think its help that the whole debate turns into a "Greens" versus the "country peolpe", or becomes personalised.

haybob · 18-10-2010 06:55PM

See our beloved financial system for unsustainable and just as a point of order farmers have been paying water charges for years and the amount of pollution for poorly built septic tanks and sewerage treatment plants is just as big a factor in polluting the water

Chinasea wrote: »

We have to be told what is obvious, and penalties have to be enforced by the EU as our unsustainable way of living in this country is a disgrace, and sadly as so many "don't get the point" the only way to get the point is with levies or taxes. Water charges are on the way etc., and again, never mind the charges, it is this wasting of water/natural resources both domestically and commercially with this insular attitude of not seeing the bigger picture is one of the major problems in this country.

reilig · 18-10-2010 07:42PM

So why ban domestic turf cutters who have cut turf for hundreds of years, who cut only 30m3 of turf per year and in turn preserve heather bogs and create ponds for wildlife - birds, frogs etc to continue to grow not to mention the drainage that it does.

Why stop the ordinary domestic turf cutter who gives more to the environment by cutting turf than he takes from the environment by taking his 30m3 of peat??? Why do this and impose no restrictions on Bord Na Mona who have wiped out hundreds of thousands of acres of bog in the last 50 years??? A government funded project that has totally destroyed a natural habitat that does nothing to sustain our environment.

I'll tell you why they chose to stop the domestic turf cutter - it looks good in Europe. They stop a few thousand domestic turf cutters. A lot of fuss is created, lots of letters written to Europe and it looks like the restrictions imposed impact on the whole country, but there's nothing they can do about it. So at the end of the day, the Irish government have taken the easy way out to make it look like they are doing something, instead of doing something with a problem that so evidently needs to be sorted (ie. Bord Na Mona)

There's nothing unsustainable about domestic turf cutting. The unsustainable thing is all of the electricity produced by burning peat and all of the peat used to make those smokeless briquettes for all the city folk in Ireland who think that they are doing something environmentally sustainable by burning them.

The turf cutting ban is a con. Every rural dweller knows it. A rule made up by city dwellers who know nothing about turf or bogs but a rule that has serious lifestyle and financial consequences for rural dwellers. But sure if it looks good for Europe .......

Chinasea wrote: »

We have to be told what is obvious, and penalties have to be enforced by the EU as our unsustainable way of living in this country is a disgrace, and sadly as so many "don't get the point" the only way to get the point is with levies or taxes. Water charges are on the way etc., and again, never mind the charges, it is this wasting of water/natural resources both domestically and commercially with this insular attitude of not seeing the bigger picture is one of the major problems in this country.

johngalway · 18-10-2010 08:37PM

haybob wrote: »

I think turf cutting is part of our culture and no one seems to be poiting that out

100% true. Irish people are doing more to damage our culture than any EU directive. There's a group within this country that not only embrace regulation and red tape with open arms but openly crave more.

Birdnuts · 18-10-2010 08:47PM

haybob wrote: »

I think turf cutting is part of our culture and no one seems to be poiting that out

I'm all for the use of the the slain but the sausage machine is hardly an ancient part of our culture:( - i think we need to seperate the major contractors from people cutting a bit of turf for their own use.

Birdnuts · 18-10-2010 08:52PM

reilig wrote: »

So why ban domestic turf cutters who have cut turf for hundreds of years, who cut only 30m3 of turf per year and in turn preserve heather bogs and create ponds for wildlife - birds, frogs etc to continue to grow not to mention the drainage that it does.

Why stop the ordinary domestic turf cutter who gives more to the environment by cutting turf than he takes from the environment by taking his 30m3 of peat??? Why do this and impose no restrictions on Bord Na Mona who have wiped out hundreds of thousands of acres of bog in the last 50 years??? A government funded project that has totally destroyed a natural habitat that does nothing to sustain our environment.

I'll tell you why they chose to stop the domestic turf cutter - it looks good in Europe. They stop a few thousand domestic turf cutters. A lot of fuss is created, lots of letters written to Europe and it looks like the restrictions imposed impact on the whole country, but there's nothing they can do about it. So at the end of the day, the Irish government have taken the easy way out to make it look like they are doing something, instead of doing something with a problem that so evidently needs to be sorted (ie. Bord Na Mona)

There's nothing unsustainable about domestic turf cutting. The unsustainable thing is all of the electricity produced by burning peat and all of the peat used to make those smokeless briquettes for all the city folk in Ireland who think that they are doing something environmentally sustainable by burning them.

The turf cutting ban is a con. Every rural dweller knows it. A rule made up by city dwellers who know nothing about turf or bogs but a rule that has serious lifestyle and financial consequences for rural dwellers. But sure if it looks good for Europe .......

If you think Bord Na Mona are a problem now - wait until their privitized to pay for the banks and the vulture capitalists have control of over 80,000 acres of our boglands:(

LostCovey · 18-10-2010 10:36PM

reilig wrote: »

So why ban domestic turf cutters who have cut turf for hundreds of years, who cut only 30m3 of turf per year and in turn preserve heather bogs and create ponds for wildlife - birds, frogs etc to continue to grow not to mention the drainage that it does.

Reilig,

The drainage is the problem.

A drained bog is a damaged bog - wrecked from an ecological point of view. The reason that domestic cutting is banned on some bogs is that these are small fragmentary relics of the bog systems that covered large parts of the country. Bord na Móna di a massive amount of state-sponsored vandalism. Totally agree. Unfortunately the small bogs that are left are all we have, and they were always too small for B Na M.

The idea of the ban is to preserve the best of what is left. Very unfortunate for the people cutting them, but the alternative is keep going till its all cut away or wrecked by drainage and cutting.

LostCovey

Birdnuts · 18-10-2010 11:19PM

LostCovey wrote: »

Reilig,

The drainage is the problem.

A drained bog is a damaged bog - wrecked from an ecological point of view. The reason that domestic cutting is banned on some bogs is that these are small fragmentary relics of the bog systems that covered large parts of the country. Bord na Móna di a massive amount of state-sponsored vandalism. Totally agree. Unfortunately the small bogs that are left are all we have, and they were always too small for B Na M.

The idea of the ban is to preserve the best of what is left. Very unfortunate for the people cutting them, but the alternative is keep going till its all cut away or wrecked by drainage and cutting.

LostCovey

I think if the compo matches the price of a replacement plot nearby it would satisfy all sides:)

O.A.P · 19-10-2010 12:19AM

Yep

O.A.P · 19-10-2010 12:24AM

Birdnuts wrote: »

I think if the compo matches the price of a replacement plot nearby it would satisfy all sides:)

Right let them eat cake.:D

LostCovey · 19-10-2010 12:33AM

O.A.P wrote: »

Right let them eat cake.:D

Precisely.

Soda cake smashed to crumbs in an enamel bucket and cold tea from a cidona bottle.

It's a long way from the Hymac, the hopper machine on the John Deere and a Polish driver on the mobile phone all day.

Romantic Ireland's dead and gone, it's with O'Leary in the grave.

LostCovey

5live · 19-10-2010 09:02AM

LostCovey wrote: »

Precisely.

Soda cake smashed to crumbs in an enamel bucket and cold tea from a cidona bottle.

It's a long way from the Hymac, the hopper machine on the John Deere and a Polish driver on the mobile phone all day.

Romantic Ireland's dead and gone, it's with O'Leary in the grave.

LostCovey

Or is it a case of 'tread softly as you tread on my dreams'?

reilig · 19-10-2010 09:49AM

Lads, its Dublin 4 environmentalists who are making the rules for rural dwellers. Chinasea talks about waste and highlights the waste of water resources. So why don't the D4 environmentalists put a restriction on water uses. Turn off the taps so that people can only use it at certain times of the day - it would be as sensible as the turf cutting ban (or as nonsensible, but you see my point). Or maybe they could try to fix the leaks that are causing the waste.

It comes down to easy targets. Domestic turf cutters are easy targets in this society. The people making the environmental laws won't pass laws that will impact on themselves. D4 politics again, no consultation, no thought for anyone.

Birdnuts · 19-10-2010 11:11AM

O.A.P wrote: »

Right let them eat cake.:D

Even cake will be in short supply after the next few budgets:(

CJhaughey · 19-10-2010 02:35PM

Chinasea wrote: »

Shame we couldn't could work out for ourselves that our over fishing was unsustainable,

What overfishing? We have the 2nd biggest fishing waters in the EU and about 4% of the fleet. Do you really think we overfish? We take a fraction of what the other EU countries take in terms of fish catch in our waters and you think we overfish?
You must be living in a different Ireland to me.

johngalway · 19-10-2010 03:10PM

CJhaughey wrote: »

What overfishing? We have the 2nd biggest fishing waters in the EU and about 4% of the fleet. Do you really think we overfish? We take a fraction of what the other EU countries take in terms of fish catch in our waters and you think we overfish?
You must be living in a different Ireland to me.

The mouth of what used to be a good salmon river empties into a bay across from where I live. This bay is divided in two by an island. Most of the salmon run up the farm side of that island. When they are running, you could almost walk from that island across the bay on the heads of seals.

Talking to one of the ghillies on the river this year, they told me this was the worst year ever for salmon on that river (they installed a counter years ago).

CJhaughey · 19-10-2010 03:27PM

johngalway wrote: »

The mouth of what used to be a good salmon river empties into a bay across from where I live. This bay is divided in two by an island. Most of the salmon run up the farm side of that island. When they are running, you could almost walk from that island across the bay on the heads of seals.

Talking to one of the ghillies on the river this year, they told me this was the worst year ever for salmon on that river (they installed a counter years ago).

I am not surprised one bit. Traditional netsmen were allowed to shoot seals that were predating on their nets amd this kept seal numbers manageable.
Now with driftnetting gone there is no need for the fishermen to cull seals.
Result is a gradual and noticeable increase in the seal population with no natural predators.
I predicted at the time of the driftnet ban that in a few years the anglers would be asking for a seal control cull to be in place.
Its like anything else you need to control number of naturally occuring predators or you will have an imbalance, but funnily enough for all the talk of ecosystem based management in fisheries there is zero discussion of managing the other parts of the ecosystem such as seals and other marine mammals.
I hope the chap that owns Delphi lodge just up the road a bit from you will now realise that driftnetting wasn't the worst enemy of salmon.

Chinasea · 19-10-2010 05:41PM

reilig wrote: »

Lads, its Dublin 4 environmentalists who are making the rules for rural dwellers.
It comes down to easy targets. Domestic turf cutters are easy targets in this society. The people making the environmental laws won't pass laws that will impact on themselves. D4 politics again, no consultation, no thought for anyone.

This auld line trotted out as usual when anyone mentions anything any shade of green or dare I say the allergy word 'environment'.

I respect our environment no matter where I live.

And just because something is part of our culture I fail to see how that makes it right or indeed our divine right to continue doing what we know to be detrimental. There are many hideous practices carried out in the world under this “cultural excuse” alibi.

johngalway · 19-10-2010 06:07PM

CJhaughey wrote: »

I hope the chap that owns Delphi lodge just up the road a bit from you will now realise that driftnetting wasn't the worst enemy of salmon.

That the same lad who advertises his business as being in Connemara, when it's actually in Co. Mayo?

Turf Cutting Ban

Comments