THREAT RESPONSE PLAN FOR THE HEN HARRIER 2021-2025 – Draft for Consultative Committee

June 2021

Author: Evelyn Kirwan

Prepared by the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage in consultation with The Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine The Department of Environment, Climate and Communications

The potential threats to breeding Hen Harrier that are considered to be of most significance relate to forestry, agriculture and wind energy development, as identified through the consultation process.

Q: is there a specific consultation document on forestry and/or agriculture, in a similar format to the “Hen Harrier Conservation and the Wind Energy Sector in Ireland” document? Note: Hen Harrier SPAs include commercial coniferous forest plantations (more than 50% by area).

Table 1. List of factors considered to be acting as pressures and/or threats (of H=high; M=medium; L=low importance) to breeding and wintering Hen Harrier populations in Ireland. This information has been compiled from recent assessments for Hen Harrier, as reported by Ireland under Article 12 of the Birds Directive (2019). Please note for ‘Season’ below, B = Breeding and W = Wintering.

N.B. The number of factors which could be reported out on was capped at ten. Therefore, only those factors considered to be the highest ranking for each season are listed below

Citizen Assembly on Biodiversity – Questions on Setup and Governance

  • can Govt directly appoint % of the citizens
  • can Govt appoint chair of the assembly, or is the chair appointed by the citizens themselves
  • can Govt limit issues that can be addressed, or is the remit determined by the citizens
  • are nominated expert advisers, nominated by the Govt or by the citizens
  • is the timeframe for the Assembly set by Govt or by the citizens
  • is the Assembly free to hire it’s own secretariat, or does it have to accept a secretariat from the Dept
  • does Govt or the Assembly members control the release of information and/or contents of the final report
  • will recommendations include a commitment to establish cross-party committee, similar to the JOCCA with the climate assembly
  • how do recommendations get into legislation where they may be at odds with Govt thinking (eg DAFM on nitrates, OPW on flood relief, etc)

Public Consultation on the Natura Impact Statement and Strategic Environmental Assessment for Ireland’s Draft Fifth Nitrates Action Programme

This NIS has been prepared to inform the Appropriate Assessment (AA) process required under the Habitats Directive and the European Communities (Birds and Natural Habitats) Regulations 2011. The overall purpose of the AA process is to ensure that the NAP does not result in any adverse effects on the integrity of any European sites in view of its conservation objectives and to detail proposed mitigation measures needed to avoid, reduce or eliminate likely effects on a European Site or adverse effects on the integrity of a European Site.

The purpose of this SEA Report is to inform the development of the NAP, identify describe and evaluate the likely significant effects of the implementation of the NAP and its reasonable alternatives; and provide an opportunity for the statutory authorities and the public to offer views on any aspect through consultation.

The NIS and SEA processes have been, and continue to be iterative, and are assisting in making the final NAP more robust by fully integrating wider environmental considerations into the programme.

Documents

Image: None

Ireland’s Draft Nitrates Action Programme

Download

Image: None

Ireland’s Fifth Nitrates Action Programme – Natura Impact Statement for consultation

Download

Image: None

Ireland’s Fifth Nitrates Action Programme – SEA Environmental Report for consultation

Download

Image: None

Public Consultation on the Natura Impact Assessment and Strategic Environmental Assessment for Ireland’s Draft Fifth Nitrates Action Programme

Download

Submission to the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine in relation to the Public Consultation Process on the Draft CAP Strategy 2023-2027

December 2021

Selected Notes

In an interim review of ASSAP, the adoption of implementation measures by farmers was reviewed; the costs of the proposed mitigation measures was consistently the largest obstacle for implementation;

“The greatest level of non-implementation of measures for the 20 high risk issues identified is in actions that require capital investment by farmers.”

If PAAs are prioritised within the AECM scheme, it will ensure farmers are supported to implement the targeted measures that will have the most effective outcomes for water quality.

The Forum recommends that the definition of ‘Vulnerable water area’ (currently proposed for Tier 2) should be “any water body where agriculture has been identified as a significant pressure”, and priority should be given to those identified as having a critical source area (supported by EPA PIP maps).

The Forum recommends that the proposed ‘vulnerable water area’ eligibility criterion should be included within Tier 1 (not Tier 2 as currently proposed), to allow farmers in these areas to get priority access to the AECM scheme.

The draft RBMP states that 2500km of riverside interception measures (equivalent to 3% length of all river channels) will require targeted mitigation measures to significantly improve water quality. This information is based on the EPA’s Pollution Impact Potential (PIP) maps, or critical source area maps, which combine the soils and the DAFM farm data to show, on a relative risk basis, where these hotspots, or critical source areas, are within the landscape, and also where the quickest response will likely be seen in the river if measures are implemented.

The Forum recommends that farms with a ‘vulnerable water area’, identified by EPA PIP maps as being a critical source area, should be prioritised to receive AECM payments; as targeted measures within these catchments have the potential to have significant improvements in water quality, along with co-benefits for biodiversity and climate.

The Forum is concerned that the proposed limit of 50,000 farmers for the AECM will not be sufficient to support all farmers who are either in a PAA or a ‘vulnerable water area’.

Forum recommends that greater consideration be given to requiring spatially targeted extended buffer
zones, whereby they are added as a mandatory measure within Tier 2 for vulnerable water bodies in poorly draining areas where runoff of pollutants is posing a threat to watercourses.

In freely draining areas, a high proportion of rainfall infiltrates vertically underground to the water table, thereby flowing underground and bypassing much of the nearby buffer zones.

Forum is of the view that that a dedicated strategy will be required for peatland re-wetting, which is properly funded, with inter-department collaboration across Government and transitional supports for farmers, as it has mutual benefits for water quality, climate and biodiversity.

Download the submission here

EPA Consultations (Latest)

EPAs latest consultation documents details via RSS

You can use this RSS feed to alert you when a new EPA consultation is released

https://www.epa.ie/publications/corporate/consultations/