Intensive cattle farming causing severe damage to protected Wexford dunes

kilmuckridge

See story in Irish times:
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2010/0730/1224275809136.html
and pictures at http://sites.google.com/site/kilmuckridge1/photos/5

This site was the best grey dune habitat in Ireland prior to its bulldozing, but is now several inches to feet deep in places in cattle excrement. The farmer broke countless regulations while authorities not only sat on their hands, but paid higher subsidies due to the large number of cattle held.

Even now the Parks and Wildlife (www.npws.ie) refuse to prosecute him, and he has the brass neck to say he is negotiating with them, like they owe him for telling him not to break the law.

<MODSNIP>

AngryHippie

the EPA ?
EU Commissioner ?

kilmuckridge

Hi AngryHippie,
The EPA have said they would look into it, but that they did not have the resources to expand their monitoring remit. Before they knew there was fish in the nearby stream (which at one point had over 4 and 8 times the mandatory limits for Faecal Streptococci and E coli respectively) they had little interest in the matter. I don't know what they intend to do, but if they don't hear more about it from the general public, it may be forgotten again.

A complaint to the EC is being prepared, but they require all avenues to be exhausted within the member state before they will take a complaint seriously, and the wheels turn slowly enough in Brussels. If nothing is done, Ireland will eventually find itself fined tens of thousands of euro per day until our legislation and its implementation complies with EU directives.

The reaction from the NPWS still seems to be largely that if it ignores the issue long enough, it will eventually go away; it is vital to continuously remind them that this is not the case

Mahatma coat

....John Bailey, who owns the land.....

See, this is the important bit.

If you are so concerned about it, I recomend you make the farmer a reasonable offer for the Land, then YOU get to decide what happens to it.

kilmuckridge

It makes no difference if he owns it or not. Breaking the law is breaking the law. The purpose of the subsidy he recieved is to keep the land in good agricultural and environmental condition, he has failed to do so.

In fact he owns part of the land, not all of it. It must have been out of the scope of the Irish Times article to cover that aspect. Besides which, if at the end of the day someone is going to make him an offer for the part he owns-it should be the NPWS, not me.

I agree though, that someone with such disregard for this land should not own any of it.

AngryHippie

Mahatma coat wrote: »

See, this is the important bit.

If you are so concerned about it, I recomend you make the farmer a reasonable offer for the Land, then YOU get to decide what happens to it.

Anyone that buys that plot of ground now, will end up having to fork out for it whenever the EPA or Local Council or EU or whoever pops the thumb out first set a fine and re-instatement conditions. This Pr**k should be hit with the full bill immediately, coastal habitats are delicate enough without clowns like this getting away with poor ag practice. Aside from the fact that he was no doubt claiming every cent he could from Dept. of Agriculture. He should face the bill or do time for it, If Wexford beaches went the way of Lough Sheelin in the 80's and 90's people would suddenly start wailing and gnashing teeth. Make an example of the Ar$ehole, make him pay...

Cookie_Monster

Mahatma coat wrote: »

See, this is the important bit.

If you are so concerned about it, I recomend you make the farmer a reasonable offer for the Land, then YOU get to decide what happens to it.

like in the other thread you seem to think ownership gives you the right to flout any law you like. Don't be so nieve!

djpbarry

Mahatma coat wrote: »

See, this is the important bit.

If you are so concerned about it, I recomend you make the farmer a reasonable offer for the Land, then YOU get to decide what happens to it.

I'm going to acquire a plot of land next to your house and use it for nuclear testing - I trust you have no objections, seeing as how it'll be my land and all that?

kilmuckridge

I think it will be released from the paywall in 2 days time.
The article is available to read here:
http://sites.google.com/site/kilmuckridge1/irish-times-article

kilmuckridge

A news article appeared in the Gorey Guardian today
<MODSNIP>
however the article suggests that John Bailey is co-operating with the NPWS. Mr Bailey was instructed to remove the weeds, but has merely cut them and left them where they are. Most of the weeds have already formed seeds, so cutting them without removing them is of limited benefit.

Mahatma coat

djpbarry wrote: »

I'm going to acquire a plot of land next to your house and use it for nuclear testing - I trust you have no objections, seeing as how it'll be my land and all that?

Fine with me, Alto the neighbour might be a little upset about you nukin his nice house, but I suppose if ya want to spend $750K to a Mil on a house it your perogative what you do with it

Cookie_Monster

Mahatma coat wrote: »

Fine with me, Alto the neighbour might be a little upset about you nukin his nice house, but I suppose if ya want to spend $750K to a Mil on a house it your perogative what you do with it

:rolleyes:

kilmuckridge

IFA officials have previously aided John Bailey in negotiations with the Authorities aimed at avoiding penalties for his criminal activities, however the new IFA President has stated this week that he would condemn activities such as those Mr Bailey has been engaged in. From RTE Radio One News 05/08/2010:

Michael Ewing (Irish Environmental Network):
For the likes of us and the IFA condemning those farmers who do carry out atrocious acts of demolition of the environment. If you look at the work of this particular farmer in Kilmuckridge as a prime example, and I could list other examples within my own area that I've seen where farmers have been behaving in a totally antisocial manner."

RTE Radio News:
"And John, would you be willing to condemn such activities?"

IFA President, John Bryan:
"Anywhere I'd see someone failing to take proper account of the environment and doing damage, I would."

kilmuckridge

The Irish Times article is out of paywall; the original article can now be seen at:
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/archive/2010/0730/Pg002.html#Ar00202:1D32EF21E2FC1F8439243446

Having just visited the area again, it is clear that the weed-cutting was a farce, as huge stands of weeds remain on the ridge of cattle dung, covering several acres. There is no point in cutting weeds in half a field, as the uncut weeds will ensure that seeds cover the entire site again

demonspawn

Mahatma coat wrote: »

See, this is the important bit.

If you are so concerned about it, I recomend you make the farmer a reasonable offer for the Land, then YOU get to decide what happens to it.

I own a half-acre site beside a primary school in Leitrim. I'm gonna start letting waste management companies dump toxic waste on my land so I can make a profit. Oh wait....

Birdnuts

Mahatma coat wrote: »

See, this is the important bit.

If you are so concerned about it, I recomend you make the farmer a reasonable offer for the Land, then YOU get to decide what happens to it.

So let the chap do what he likes - I assuming therefore you have no problem with illegal dumping, ground water pollution etc. so long as the source is on someones elses land:rolleyes:

joelietz

Birdnuts wrote: »

So let the chap do what he likes - I assuming therefore you have no problem with illegal dumping, ground water pollution etc. so long as the source is on someones elses land:rolleyes:

I personally think there's limits to how much anyone can get away with just because they do things on their land. I had a neighbor poking his nose into my renovations and he got really upset when he saw I was ignoring his offer to use his brother's insulation product and went with a much less expensive spray foam insulation that he claimed was the worst stuff on the planet. As it turned out I had opted for a "green" product that's not only more environmentally thoughtful, but also less toxic than his brother's solution.

We had a bit of a backyard battle going on with trees, and such, and he claimed my cheap house was making his seem less valuable!! It was all a crock; I ignored him and he just went away without a leg to stand on because it's my property and I'm not really effecting him at all.

However if someone in my area was destroying habitats and causing very massive damage, I'd be very involved in talks with authorities and trying to find a way for the land and the farmer to co-exist, namely having the sensitive areas purchased so the farmer isn't out of pocket and we still have the sensitive land area.

So even as someone who's defended his rights to doing what he pleases, I would be concerned by this..

Mahatma coat

Birdnuts wrote: »

So let the chap do what he likes - I assuming therefore you have no problem with illegal dumping, ground water pollution etc. so long as the source is on someones elses land:rolleyes:

the Man is Keeping CATTLE in the field, not Nuclear Feckin Waste, you object to a Farmer keeping Cattle in His field, you do understand what Beef/Dairy farmers do for a living right?

Macha

Mahatma coat wrote: »

the Man is Keeping CATTLE in the field, not Nuclear Feckin Waste, you object to a Farmer keeping Cattle in His field, you do understand what Beef/Dairy farmers do for a living right?

The man's cattle have destroyed a rare habitat. Moreover, the cattle were not treated properly and were left in inappropriate conditions.

Mahatma coat

Sand dunes aint that RARE on the Coast of Wexford tho are they, its one long stretch from the North Slob to Courtown.

sh1tstirrer

It isn't as bad as wanting to make a motorway through the hill of Tara.

blue5000

What this farmer did is wrong. But I wonder might there be a long term benefit from all the extra organic matter on the sand dunes? If it recovers the dunes might be able to support a much broader variety of wild life species. I think if the cattle are taken off now it will be interesting to see how the area recovers.

10-10-20

If you have a unique sand environment such as what's down there, you don't just toss a bunch of faecal matter into it to see what it produces.
After you've finished doing that to every environment you'll soon find that you no longer have any unique environments and all you're left with is a very dull and non-differentiated landscape...

If somebody doesn't fight to preserve what's left of these corner-cases, we'll loose a rich heritage.

demonspawn

Mahatma coat wrote: »

Sand dunes aint that RARE on the Coast of Wexford tho are they, its one long stretch from the North Slob to Courtown.

They will be when every farmer is allowed to keep their cattle there. What the hell are cattle even doing on sand dunes? I didn't know sand was part of their diet. They have no business being there in the first place. If anything it's dangerous to the cattle. All it takes is a bit of oversaturated sand and those cattle will be stuck up to their bellies. He should be done for endangering animals at the very least.

Mahatma coat

Cattle are in the Mans field, that field happens to be on the edge of the coastline, the cattle are there eating the Grass, but seriously do you really believe that cattle would Sink on a rainy day?????

djpbarry

Mahatma coat wrote: »

Cattle are in the Mans field...

A farming friend of mine has a stream running through one of his fields. Would you deem it acceptable for him to empty his septic tank into said stream? You probably would for the sake of being argumentative (as you did above), but the point is that just because you own land, doesn't mean you get to do what you want with it.

kilmuckridge

Mahatma coat wrote: »

Cattle are in the Mans field, that field happens to be on the edge of the coastline, the cattle are there eating the Grass, but seriously do you really believe that cattle would Sink on a rainy day?????

You seem to be very ill-informed, and are trying to spread misinformation.
I know the case well.

FOR THE RECORD:

The farmer doesn't own the dunes (Please stop repeating the lie that he does, or take a trip to the land registry and registry of deeds and valuation office to see for yourself)

The rare habitat exists because of the low nutrient levels. Adding nutrients destroys the habitat. The "restoration by leaving it" results in 30 acres of thistles and docks. these LOVE high nutrient levels.

Mahatma coat wrote: »

the cattle are there eating the Grass

THERE IS NO GRASS THERE, ONLY DUNG
The land is not a field that happens to be on the coast, it was demonstrably dune when included in the conservation area. (see http://maps.osi.ie/publicviewer/#V1,718695,640152,7 AND PLEASE DO CLICK ON "Ortho 2000" to check if you don't believe me.)

Cattle are allowed on the dunes to keep down scrub and keep the habitat diverse, at a stocking rate of 1 per hectare, not almost 100 per hectare as was the case here. They are not allowed supplementary food, as was being fed here as there was no vegetation on the site

Mahatma coat wrote: »

do you really believe that cattle would Sink on a rainy day

I observed the cattle in 2007 wading up to their bellies in their own effluent to get to the feeding trough. :eek:

having the sensitive areas purchased so the farmer isn't out of pocket

The farmer is not out of pocket, having made likely over a million euro from his destruction (He received over 800k in subsidies alone) and does not own the land to sell it.

kilmuckridge

Mahatma coat wrote: »

Sand dunes aint that RARE on the Coast of Wexford tho are they, its one long stretch from the North Slob to Courtown.

You have obviously never been there. They are shrinking all along the coast except here. 80% of fixed dunes do not have favourable conservation status, so just because they are on the map does not mean the valuable habitat is really present.

Finally, let's all look at the lovely cows eating the Grass on the man's Field

[MODEDIT]Please don't insert such large images into posts - not everyone has broadband! A link is usually sufficient. Thanks.[/MODEDIT]

demonspawn

Poor cows. Never mind the dunes, poor devils must be miserable.
Was this pic taken recently? Shouldn't they have a bit more meat on their bones this time of year?

Feargal as Luimneach

demonspawn wrote: »

Poor cows. Never mind the dunes, poor devils must be miserable.
Was this pic taken recently? Shouldn't they have a bit more meat on their bones this time of year?

Most of them are Fresians so thats why they look thin. The animals in the photos look healthy and are in good body condition. I'd be more worried about the dune damage to be honest.

recedite

kilmuckridge wrote: »

The farmer doesn't own the dunes (Please stop repeating the lie that he does, or take a trip to the land registry and registry of deeds and valuation office to see for yourself)

Usually landowners own down to the high tide mark, and it does say in the Irish Times article that he owns it. However if you are sure that he does not, then maybe there is some fraud going on, given that he is claiming €100,000 a year in EU subsidies.

It looks like he has seen some pictures of the giant sandy "feed lots" they keep millions of cattle on in southern USA and South America, and decided to cash in on the subsidies with his own version.
The difference is they don't have the same rainy weather there, or the EU subsidies, or the SAC status.