This turf cutting row - will Europe ever know?

Lima Golf · 22-06-2012 03:17AM

what gives you the right to say digging up bog and burning it is the intended purpose? QUOTE

Over 500 years of people digging up bog and burning it kind of indicates that it's the intended purpose...

Cutting and saving turf is not an easy task. It takes 4 of us doing at least 8-10 long days of back breaking work but the annual savings versus oil or gas made it worthwhile. The "heaps of cash" as you say, may contribute towards alternative fuel but won't cover the fact we now own land that is completely worthless and of no use to us.

Rasheed · 22-06-2012 03:52AM

I get that the government will get fined and of course I don't want that. I personally think the compensation is very fair, was never a big fan of a sore back after a week of footing, but even less of a fan of being cold in winter!

What I don't get is what are we saving the bogs for? A heritage site? Are people really thinking that townies are going to make a day trip to see a bog? Am I missing something? Correct me if I am!

Cookie_Monster · 22-06-2012 04:31AM

Lima Golf wrote: »

Over 500 years of people digging up bog and burning it kind of indicates that it's the intended purpose...

and the however many thousands and thousands of years before that?

The "heaps of cash" as you say, may contribute towards alternative fuel but won't cover the fact we now own land that is completely worthless and of no use to us

it's invaluable, not worthless which is why it's being protected in the first place. To think it's only use is to be raped for cheap fuel is a pretty awful attitude too tbh.

crusher000 · 22-06-2012 05:53AM

All levels of farming, crop production etc. can be deemed as damaging to the land. Turf cutting has been around for 100's of years and someone that solely relies on turf will have the view that no amount of compensation will make up for it. So your given money to stop cutting turf but what do you do with the money if ,

A. your house isn't plumbed for oil or gas heating. Compensation won't cover the cost of installing new sysem and purchase of oil/gas.

B. You buy turf of someone else thus increasing the amount of turf that they have to cut to supply a person that no longer can cut turf. That really helps preserve bogs.

I say close all the parks in the Inner Cities to make up for the depletion of the bogs cause to me that's a waste of land and can't see the point to them. All that cutting grass and trimming of hedges are restricting the natural ability of plantation to flourish in it's natural capabilities.

Galwayguy35 · 22-06-2012 06:12AM

I went down to see what was happening on Tuesday as I live in Woodford. Was weird to see all the RTE and TV3 cameras around the place. I didn't think it would make national news two days in a row

Pedant · 22-06-2012 06:16AM

malachyscott wrote: »

I was listening to it on the radio today. Someone put forward the argument that they deserve to cut the turf because it fuels their fires and keeps their family warm.

If this is their argument then I'm fully behind banning it. I don't have a bog in my back yard, I have to buy turf. I do live near a forest, but I can't go cut down a tree cause I want firewood.

Ridiculous argument. If there's a bog on their land or if they share a designated commons, they own that bog (or at least a portion of it) and should be allowed to do whatever they want with it. They own it after all. Similarly, if you own a plot of lands that had a few trees on it, you should be allowed to fell those trees and cut them up for firewood if that's your wish, after all, you own the trees.

The fact that you don't have a bog in your back garden is your problem, not theirs. I don't see what gives you the right to tell people what they can do with their land or property just because you're at a disadvantage because you don't own something that they do. It's this sense of entitlement that really sickens me.

According you your logic, people should be forced to use piped water instead of spring wells because you don't have a spring under your property. Or maybe we should stop people from growing vegetables in their own back garden and forced them to buy in supermarkets with designated suppliers because you live on the fifth story of an apartment block and don't have a garden to grow your own vegetables.

If it were the case, however, that people were cutting turf on land that isn't theirs and weren't given permission by the owner, then, obviously, they should be stopped.

Lima Golf · 22-06-2012 06:34AM

it's invaluable, not worthless which is why it's being protected in the first place. To think it's only use is to be raped for cheap fuel is a pretty awful attitude too tbh.[/Quote]

That actually made me laugh. It is totally worthless. When you can't cut turf, graze animals, build a house or grow crops on a piece of land you own it's of no value to you! You can't use it and you cant sell it. If that's not worthless piece of ground to own, I don't know what is.

And as for "raping" the bog for cheap fuel, where do you think your oil/gas/coal or whatever you use comes from? Do you not think the oil/gas resevoirs are being "raped". Maybe we should preserve all types of fuel sources in this country and pray for a tropical winter.

22-06-2012 06:58AM

Protecting bogs? Jesus Christ.. Politicians get paid for this shlte.

Pedant · 22-06-2012 06:59AM

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

what gives you the right to say digging up bog and burning it is the intended purpose?

What gives you the right to dictate what people can do with their own land?

Capt'n Midnight · 22-06-2012 07:18AM

Pedant wrote: »

Ridiculous argument. If there's a bog on their land or if they share a designated commons, they own that bog (or at least a portion of it) and should be allowed to do whatever they want with it. They own it after all. Similarly, if you own a plot of lands that had a few trees on it, you should be allowed to fell those trees and cut them up for firewood if that's your wish, after all, you own the trees.

You do realise we have inherited Norman rules for land use rights,

Which means even if you own the land outright, not just a 1,000 year lease or other title you don't automatically get rights to stuff like fishing in the river flowing through it. You may not get rights to forestry (not sure about this).

But I'm fairly sure that the rights to minerals under your land are separate to the land itself. Defining turf as a mineral (it's non renewable after all unless you recreate a new bog) would remove the rights a lá ye olde surrender and regrant.

Let's not forget that the government has the option of compulsory purchase order anyway.

robp · 22-06-2012 07:55AM

The BBC have picked on this. The only moral and economic option left is to start enforcing Irish law and protect these sites. The bog cutters would have you believe they know more about ecology than the authorities on this. Nothing whatsoever to back their claims that bog cutting is not damaging. Are we supposed to ignore the litany of findings against their activities E.G. the EPA's report Boglands or the Fernandez report which condemn bog cutting and simply trust them? That simply won't wash outside Ireland lads.

dmcronin · 22-06-2012 08:05AM

Why doesn't anyone stop Bord na Mona then????? They've been doing it for donkeys years with fcuk-off sized machinery.

22-06-2012 08:13AM

Chucken wrote: »

I wonder how many will comment here,who have never spent a back breaking day/summer in the bog

Free??? it is,ya!

I was turning mine a couple of weeks ago, just waiting for a fre dry days before taking it home. I may be waiting 'till September with all the rain we're having!

In this area, the amount of turf cut appears to be at an all time high, many are turning to turf as oil is now too expensive.

22-06-2012 08:25AM

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

You do realise we have inherited Norman rules for land use rights,

Which means even if you own the land outright, not just a 1,000 year lease or other title you don't automatically get rights to stuff like fishing in the river flowing through it. You may not get rights to forestry (not sure about this).

But I'm fairly sure that the rights to minerals under your land are separate to the land itself. Defining turf as a mineral (it's non renewable after all unless you recreate a new bog) would remove the rights a lá ye olde surrender and regrant.

Let's not forget that the government has the option of compulsory purchase order anyway.

Most people who own bogland will have on the land registration documents a section relating to turbury rights (cutting and saving turf), there is usually also a section specifically excluding mineral rights.

Feathers · 22-06-2012 08:27AM

Lima Golf wrote: »

We own our bog, why should we be banned from using the land for its intended purpose?

Turf cutting is an Irish tradition, part of our heritage and culture in many areas of the country.

I'm sure there are some South Americans saying the same thing about logging the rainforests.

Bogs aren't being protected for the sake of it, they're a natural habitat for flora/fauna that's getting wiped out. While it is a nice tradition continued to be done by families and neighbours by hand, this protection has to come first.

That said, why should the owners take the financial hit for a national/EU decision? The bogs should be bought under a compulsory purchase order, as per any other land the government wants, at a fair market price.

22-06-2012 08:28AM

Lima Golf wrote: »

it's invaluable, not worthless which is why it's being protected in the first place. To think it's only use is to be raped for cheap fuel is a pretty awful attitude too tbh
That actually made me laugh. It is totally worthless. When you can't cut turf, graze animals, build a house or grow crops on a piece of land you own it's of no value to you! You can't use it and you cant sell it. If that's not worthless piece of ground to own, I don't know what is.

And as for "raping" the bog for cheap fuel, where do you think your oil/gas/coal or whatever you use comes from? Do you not think the oil/gas resevoirs are being "raped". Maybe we should preserve all types of fuel sources in this country and pray for a tropical winter.

If you're prevented from cutting turf, it may be worth trying to grwo SRC willow on it. I've started one acre of willow this year at the back of the house, hopefully in a few years I will have a supply of firewood.

Willow will grow well on bogland as well.

22-06-2012 08:30AM

Feathers wrote: »

I'm sure there are some South Americans saying the same thing about logging the rainforests.

Bogs aren't being protected for the sake of it, they're a natural habitat for flora/fauna that's getting wiped out. While it is a nice tradition continued to be done by families and neighbours by hand, this protection has to come first.

That said, why should the owners take the financial hit for a national/EU decision? The bogs should be bought under a compulsory purchase order, as per any other land the government wants, at a fair market price.

Big difference between clearing land to grow beefburgers for fat Americans and cutting turf to heat your home!

IrishHomer · 22-06-2012 08:42AM

Deleted User wrote: »

Big difference between clearing land to grow beefburgers for fat Americans and cutting turf to heat your home!

Turf is useless at heating a home unless Roscommon turf is extra special.

prinz · 22-06-2012 09:52AM

Biggins wrote: »

Wouldn't be the first daft thing they have done!

Most of which are urban myths and total bollix. There was never a bendy banana law, or a curved cucumber law. What there was was an EU wide approved system of grading certain products so that Joe Bloggs in Ireland knew approximately what he'd be getting if he ordered an artic full of cucumbers from Portugal.

http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/communication/take_part/myths/fact_033_en.htm

22-06-2012 10:27AM

IrishHomer wrote: »

Turf is useless at heating a home unless Roscommon turf is extra special.

Your house must have useless insulation!

I have no problems heating a 200m2 house with underfloor heating.

stevenmu · 22-06-2012 10:39AM

NIMAN wrote: »

And can't see officials from Europe standing around these bogs all over the country to see if anyone is cutting on them.

FWIW the EU won't actually check if people are cutting turf or not. They simply insist that the government put effective measures in place to prevent turf cutting, and then fine them if measures are not put in place. They may occasionally audit what ever measures are put in place to to ensure that they are considered sufficient, but they're unlikely to actually stake out a bog and see if anybody turns up (altough the measure that the government put in place may include that).

bastados · 22-06-2012 10:47AM

A lot of countries openly refuse to go along with EU regulations...do we have to play the model example of shining bureaucratic bullshiite?

runawaybishop · 22-06-2012 10:58AM

dmcronin wrote: »

Why doesn't anyone stop Bord na Mona then????? They've been doing it for donkeys years with fcuk-off sized machinery.

The protected bogs are raised bogs, of which we have a large proportion compared to the rest of Europe - they make up about 1% of the bogs in Ireland though. BNM cuts on blanket bogs.

Helium · 22-06-2012 11:08AM

Anybody else think it's a bit ironic that we now may have too smuggle turf inside a trailer load of beer or firearms instead of other way around:D

fishy fishy · 22-06-2012 11:15AM

Lima Golf wrote: »

it's invaluable, not worthless which is why it's being protected in the first place. To think it's only use is to be raped for cheap fuel is a pretty awful attitude too tbh.

That actually made me laugh. It is totally worthless. When you can't cut turf, graze animals, build a house or grow crops on a piece of land you own it's of no value to you! You can't use it and you cant sell it. If that's not worthless piece of ground to own, I don't know what is.

And as for "raping" the bog for cheap fuel, where do you think your oil/gas/coal or whatever you use comes from? Do you not think the oil/gas resevoirs are being "raped". Maybe we should preserve all types of fuel sources in this country and pray for a tropical winter.[/QUOTE]

whats amazing to me is that they only want "some bogs". They have no problem "swopping" a person's bog on their own land for a bog halfway across Ireland.

So please don't pretend they are "protecting" anything. If the were, they wouldn't be offering an alternative bog 100 miles away, now would they.

Sarky · 22-06-2012 11:16AM

More than half of the antibiotics and anti-cancer drugs known to man are produced by bacteria that usually grow in delicate places like shallow coastal water or bogs. Biodiversity sites are kind of a big deal, and worth a metric f*cktonne more when they're not sliced up and burned.

fishy fishy · 22-06-2012 11:17AM

robp wrote: »

The BBC have picked on this. The only moral and economic option left is to start enforcing Irish law and protect these sites. The bog cutters would have you believe they know more about ecology than the authorities on this. Nothing whatsoever to back their claims that bog cutting is not damaging. Are we supposed to ignore the litany of findings against their activities E.G. the EPA's report Boglands or the Fernandez report which condemn bog cutting and simply trust them? That simply won't wash outside Ireland lads.

you do know that it is only CERTAIN bogs that they want protected. Not All - kind of defeats that argument doesn't it.

Cool Mo D · 22-06-2012 11:21AM

fishy fishy wrote: »

you do know that it is only CERTAIN bogs that they want protected. Not All - kind of defeats that argument doesn't it.

No, it makes it stronger. Only a small fraction of bogs need to be protected, turf cutter have been compensated for them, and they still won't stop ruining them.

gbee · 22-06-2012 11:24AM

NIMAN wrote: »

And can't see officials from Europe standing around these bogs all over the country to see if anyone is cutting on them.

Daily satellite images will show up the cutting progress.

On good days it will show the actual people working; if they take an interest in it they can request military scans that will give the reg number of vehicles on the bog.

fishy fishy · 22-06-2012 11:27AM

Cool Mo D wrote: »

No, it makes it stronger. Only a small fraction of bogs need to be protected, turf cutter have been compensated for them, and they still won't stop ruining them.

all of a sudden this 1% of bogs needs to be "protected" because somebody in german says so? :roll eyes: after millions of years with no problem.

how convenient.

The scariest thing is the little runt kenny, who just so happens to come from bog country himself has no problem selling out his neighbors to get a thumbs up from angela and her cronies. Shameful.

So thats the fishing tradition gone, the bog tradition gone, - what will be the next irish tradition to suffer.

This turf cutting row - will Europe ever know?

Comments