The Irish Natura and Hill Farmers’ Association (INHFA) has voiced its concern over the Nature Restoration Law and its impact on hill farming in Ireland.
The association’s president Vincent Roddy has said the actions of the Nature Restoration Law would, for hill farmers, “see an end to farming”.
The comments were made in relation to the proposed law which would require European Union (EU) member states to “put in place the restoration measures that are necessary to re-establish the habitat types listed in Annex 1 in areas not covered by those habitat types”.
The main Annex 1 habitat in Ireland, according to the INHFA, is wet and dry heath, which covers most hills in the country and would affect hill farmers and their communities.
In June 2022, a Nature Restoration Law to increase biodiversity in areas including managed forests and agricultural land was proposed by the European Commission.
The proposal has an aim of restoring 20% of EU land and sea by 2030, and all ecosystems in need of restoration by 2050. It also includes binding restoration targets for specific habitats and species.
Nature restoration
This article of the Nature Restoration Law, Roddy said “will require the re-establishment of these habitat features in areas where they no longer exist”.
“Where they do exist and are deemed to be damaged, will require landowners and farmers to restore these areas to good condition.”
In assessing these areas for restoration, it states in the law proposal that “documented losses over at least the last 70 years” must be accounted for.
The INHFA leader said this allows member states to “go back as far as they deem necessary to establish the habitat type and condition”.
Referring to a report on the changes in heather moorland in upland Britain and Ireland over the last 200 years, Roddy said: “This and possibly other reports that we have not yet found will, through the Nature Restoration Law, provide the basis for the Irish State to act against existing landowners as they aim to re-establish our upland areas to a pre-famine landscape.”
Effect on hill farmers
Roddy said the “agenda to re-wild and depopulate our uplands is well on course”.
He said the effect the law would have on hill farmers is “something that has been lost on many, including our public representatives”.
The INHFA leader raised the issue of rewetting being incentivised on a voluntary basis by the environment committee of the European Parliament.
The INHFA president said: “There is no such proposal for farmers on our hills impacted by habitat re-establishment.”
“25 years ago many hill farmers were thrown under the bus with the implementation of the SAC [Special Areas of Conservation] and SPA [Special Protection Areas] land designations. This happened under the watchful eye of our politicians that did nothing to protect them.
“Once again we are at a critical point and we must now ask what politicians will step forward and do what they are elected to do, that is to protect those that have put them there.”
Subsidies
Roddy continued: “While there may be an assumption that these farmers will be paid to deliver on ecosystem services, there is no indication of this in the proposed law.”
The Nature Restoration Law, according to Roddy, gave “a clear threat to existing support” through an article that detailed “the need to address subsidies that could negatively affect the achievement of the law’s objectives”.
This article would require an account of the subsidies, but through European Parliament amendments, Roddy said there is a proposal to “address future potential subsidies and the need to phase out, redirect or reform these subsidies”.
“Beyond the clear threat to farm subsidies, there is, for our upland farmers, no reference to how the re-establishment costs will be paid for.
“As this is a law with legally binding targets, will the farmers/landowners be expected to cover these costs?” Roddy questioned.