NRL reaction naturally split

ICSA president Sean McNamara has said he is very disappointed with the vote at the European Parliament on the Nature Restoration Law (NRL) which was carried by a vote of 329 to 275, with 24 abstentions.

“This has created a lot of concern among farmers who see this as heavy on compulsory actions and targets but light on funding commitments,” he said.

Regarding re-wetting the Government maintains targets can be met using state lands, but the ICSA say this is “uncertain”.

“The initial target is for 30% restoration of reclaimed peatlands – of which one-third must be re-wetted. However, that target reaches 50% by 2050, and it is far from clear that this will be achieved without some use of farmland.”

“A clause does allow some deviation from this target for member states that are severely impacted -like Ireland - but this may be contingent on a future government agreeing to seek the necessary flexibilities. As we have seen with the Nitrates Directive, it is one thing thinking that flexibility will be there in the future, it is another thing delivering it when the future comes.”

Regarding targets for restoring habitats Mr McNamara claimed the figure was “plucked out of the fresh air under the EU Biodiversity Strategy” and that it “ignores the financial and productivity impacts”.

“The target demanded for 2050 is for 90% restoration of habitats and there are three indicators: increased soil carbon; grassland butterfly index and share of land with high diversity landscape features. It seems ok until Annex IV is consulted where it describes high diversity landscape features as things we have lots of in Ireland such as hedgerows, stone walls, single or groups of trees, small wetlands etc. The alarming thing is that it says that such land cannot be under productive agricultural use unless such use is necessary for the preservation of biodiversity and that such lands cannot receive fertiliser or pesticide treatment except for low input treatment with solid manure. This potentially has profound implications for the viability of this land.”

Mr McNally also flagged uncertainty over NRL schemes.

“It is all very well saying that funding will be available but all that has been committed to under the Nature Restoration Law is a report that may propose funds, but this will be contingent on EU budget negotiations in the future,” he said.

Dr. Elaine McGoff, of the Environmental Pillar, and An Taisce voiced her support in obtaining those schemes to implement this “imperfect”law.

“The real work must begin now. We look forward to working with all stakeholders and government to design a Nature Restoration Plan that can deliver for our environment as well as supporting livelihoods in rural Ireland. Essential to the success of the plan will be the establishment of a new Nature Restoration Fund, designing new agri-environmental schemes and ensuring that the State leads from the front by restoring habitats across public lands managed by Coillte and Bord Na Móna,” said Dr McGoff.

Meanwhile Oonagh Duggan, Head of Advocacy with BirdWatch Ireland, said the NRL is a compromise rather than a victory for any particular side.

“The passing of the NRL is not a victory over farmers but a victory for farmers. Farmers are on the front line of the biodiversity and climate crisis. We have seen that in Ireland in recent years, with the impact that flooding, droughts and fodder crisis have had on farmers. Farming needs a stable climate and healthy and resilient environment and many of our most threatened habitats and species are also dependent on sustainable farming practices.

“We must now work together to chart a new course forward where society can empower farmers, fishers and communities to lead in the restoration of nature.”