Illegal Bog-cutting, no enforcement.

Conguill

Very little of the peatlands remain in their natural state.
Peat is a dirty fuel which contributes heavily to greenhouse gas emission.

Both of these are facts.

Poeple living in certain portions of the country don't have inalienable rights to destroy wildlife habitats (and yes human cultivation does damage this) and cause pollution just becuase they have been in a bog before. Neither do they understand the bog much better than scientists and other such 'penpushers'.

Anna Nicole

[ Some people on this forum are so far removed from this fact that you'd have to question whether they have any knowledge of how rural Ireland works. Please do not comment on this issue until you've a good understanding of how rural Ireland functions, and the necessities if its people.[/QUOTE]

Well amen, you are dead right. Having worked the bog since an early age, it is not a hobby. It's hard, back breaking work but you only have to think of the cold nights coming to keep going. They are our bogs, our land and we should ba allowed to do what we want on it. There is also evidence that these bogs are self generating and continuously growing. And I don't think people realise how much bog there is in the country. I'm from Roscommon where the government took our hospital yet they've plenty of money to have helicopters flying round spying on people, cutting a few sods of turf. Hardly gangs in Moyross. So will the townies please take their heads out of their you know what's, grow up and as the quote above says, don't comment if you havent a clue.

Welease

Only a small percentage of the bogs are protected.. If they have been designated protected, then cutting should be stopped and it is somewhat unbelievable (yet believable in this country!) that law enforcement stands and watches laws being broken.

The remaining bogs are free to be harvested by both individual turf cutters and Bord Na Mona. These bogs should easily provide enough fuel for all users across the country.

This isn't an issue that necessitates people moving to alternative fuel sources.

Turf does provide a large cost saving for winterheating over the standard fossil fuels like Kerosene, while in many cases providing much better heat coverage, so for many (primarily rural) people it makes economic sense to continue to use it as a primary fuel source.

spank_inferno

Anna Nicole wrote: »

They are our bogs, our land and we should ba allowed to do what we want on it.

Well, you can't, for the same reason I cannot grow pot on my land, ie: The law says I cannot

As a poster mentioned above, these bogs are worth conserving.

And besides if we don't, Ireland (the taxpayers) will face a large fine.

Anna Nicole

spank_inferno wrote: »

Well, you can't, for the same reason I cannot grow pot on my land, ie: The law says I cannot

As a poster mentioned above, these bogs are worth conserving.

And besides if we don't, Ireland (the taxpayers) will face a large fine.

Well now there is a slight difference in turf and pot! Although both are close to Luke Ming Flanagans heart! But I get your point about being fined, we are bad enough! There is so much bog now protected, surely there is a happy balance between turf cutters and the government.

antoobrien

spank_inferno wrote: »

Well, you can't, for the same reason I cannot grow pot on my land, ie: The law says I cannot

As a poster mentioned above, these bogs are worth conserving.

And besides if we don't, Ireland (the taxpayers) will face a large fine.

Conserve != stop cutting turf. Nobody is arguing that they are not worth conserving, it how they should be conserved that people are worried about.

Pete_Cavan

Anna Nicole wrote: »

Well now there is a slight difference in turf and pot! Although both are close to Luke Ming Flanagans heart! But I get your point about being fined, we are bad enough! There is so much bog now protected, surely there is a happy balance between turf cutters and the government.

There are only 53 bogs which have been designated Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) which are now protected. Using the List of Protected bogs, and taking the area for each from the NATURA 2000 Standard Data Form on the National Parks and Wildlife Service website (eg. here), I have totalled up the all for all the bogs concerned (see excel sheet attached). This comes to 18,404.5 hectares, or 1.5% of the 1,200,000 ha of bog in this country.

The government has offered a generous compensation package and even increased it from their original offer at the start of the year. 85% of turf cutters accepted yet turf cutting is still happening on some of the bogs in question. So despite the tiny area effected, and the generous compensation offered, and accepted by the vast majority, the cutting continues. What more do you expect the government to do to find a "happy balance"?

antoobrien wrote: »

Conserve != stop cutting turf. Nobody is arguing that they are not worth conserving, it how they should be conserved that people are worried about.

What are you talking about? Raised bogs that are still active, and capable of regenerating themselves, are to have cutting ceased so as to prevent them from becoming irreparably damaged. There are many bogs which are designated Special Areas of Conservation but turf cutting can continue, as well as other bogs which are not SACs which can still be cut (more than 98% of the bog in this country). The active bogs are being conserved to prevent them suffering the same fate as those which are already irreparably damaged. How would you conserve them, by cutting them to bits too?

Uriel.

antoobrien wrote: »

I'm heartily sick of rubbish like this - if you want it protected talk to the people that know how best to protect it - the people that actually use it, not deskbound pen pushers that have never been to a bog (or worse the anti rural an taisce).

The EU law is about conservation of the bogs, that's not the same thing as stopping turf from being cut (which you'd know if you'd ever been to a bog that is cultivated).

Have a look at the Fernandez report.

The people that "use" the bog "protect" it:rolleyes: get real. how do you think that extracting turf year on year is protecting the bog? Does domestic turf cutting damage the bog at a slower pace than industrial cutting? yes of course, but that doesn't mean that domestic cutters are protecting the bog :rolleyes:

It is clear from the aerial photos on the previous page what happens when a bog is cut over time.

We (Ireland) have a legal obligation to the EU to protect these 53 bogs because they contain a european priority habitat called active raised bog - that is, a raised bog that is actively forming. the 53 sites in question are the last remaining best examples of this habitat in Ireland (Ireland has over 60% of the remaining habitat in Western Europe).

In time, if we lose this habitat it either A. Will simply cease to exist or B. take 1,000s of years to regenerate (with man made intervention (restoration)).

We face fines of up to €28,000 per day until we A. cease damaging these European Sites B. Perform restoration works to reverse the damage done since 1992. The fines are also likely to be back dated to 1992 also with an initial lump sum fine.

So we have two choice. Swallow the hard pill and deal with this matter now and enforce the law. or go to Court get hit with millions of euros of fines, possibly face injunction and then deal with the problem anyway in a few years time. Or we could just leave the EU.

People need to get real on this issue. It's a small number of bogs, yes it's a big imposition on those who are affected, but compensation measures are in place.

Uriel.

Anna Nicole wrote: »

[ Some people on this forum are so far removed from this fact that you'd have to question whether they have any knowledge of how rural Ireland works. Please do not comment on this issue until you've a good understanding of how rural Ireland functions, and the necessities if its people.

Well amen, you are dead right. Having worked the bog since an early age, it is not a hobby. It's hard, back breaking work but you only have to think of the cold nights coming to keep going. They are our bogs, our land and we should ba allowed to do what we want on it. There is also evidence that these bogs are self generating and continuously growing. And I don't think people realise how much bog there is in the country. I'm from Roscommon where the government took our hospital yet they've plenty of money to have helicopters flying round spying on people, cutting a few sods of turf. Hardly gangs in Moyross. So will the townies please take their heads out of their you know what's, grow up and as the quote above says, don't comment if you havent a clue.

the €1,300 or €1,600 a day on aircraft is nothing compared to the fines we face from Europe on this issue.

If you are so worried about how your tax money is spent then maybe you should consider not subjecting Ireland to millions of euros of fines per annum because you want to break the law. A relatively small number of people are affected by this issue, compensation measures have been put in place, I hope the Government have to sense to deal with this issue and not have the other 99.99% of the population paying for the small few who break the law on this issue.

You do not have the right to do anything you want with your land, unopposed I am afraid. The Constitution preserves the right to private property, but even that comes with caveats, specifically in relation to the public good. The Farmer and landowner in Kerry found that out earlier this year after being convicted for destroying a fairy fort.

Uriel.

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

There are only 53 bogs which have been designated Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) which are now protected. Using the List of Protected bogs, and taking the area for each from the NATURA 2000 Standard Data Form on the National Parks and Wildlife Service website (eg. here), I have totalled up the all for all the bogs concerned (see excel sheet attached). This comes to 18,404.5 hectares, or 1.5% of the 1,200,000 ha of bog in this country.

The government has offered a generous compensation package and even increased it from their original offer at the start of the year. 85% of turf cutters accepted yet turf cutting is still happening on some of the bogs in question. So despite the tiny area effected, and the generous compensation offered, and accepted by the vast majority, the cutting continues. What more do you expect the government to do to find a "happy balance"?

What are you talking about? Raised bogs that are still active, and capable of regenerating themselves, are to have cutting ceased so as to prevent them from becoming irreparably damaged. There are many bogs which are designated Special Areas of Conservation but turf cutting can continue, as well as other bogs which are not SACs which can still be cut (more than 98% of the bog in this country). The active bogs are being conserved to prevent them suffering the same fate as those which are already irreparably damaged. How would you conserve them, by cutting them to bits too?

And that doesn't even take into account issues like drainage. Even if all cutting ceased on these 53 sites tonight. The active raised bog habitat would continue to decline as the drainage put in place in order to allow turf cutting is essentially bleeding the bogs dry and destroying the habitat

Uriel.

axel7 wrote: »

Trees also act as carbon sinks, with acreage under plantation rising the whole time surely this can supplement, and in the long-term, replace the need for bogs to carry out carbon extraction.

No. Bogs are a primary carbon sink. They take in carbon from the air and store it. There is a double effect in play when you cut a bog. One you lose some of the capacity to store carbon and two you release carbon.

Turf burning emits circa twice as much carbon as other fossil fuels like coal.

Carbon, while important is a secondary issue in this case anyway. Protection of a priority European Habitat is the key issue and we are obliged to do this under EU Law. That's the bottom line

washman3

what is the biggest contributor of carbon in the air.?

Uriel.

washman3 wrote: »

what is the biggest contributor of carbon in the air.?

What difference does it make tbh?

ecocoop

Uriel. wrote: »

No. Bogs are a primary carbon sink. They take in carbon from the air and store it. There is a double effect in play when you cut a bog. One you lose some of the capacity to store carbon and two you release carbon.

Turf burning emits circa twice as much carbon as other fossil fuels like coal.

Carbon, while important is a secondary issue in this case anyway. Protection of a priority European Habitat is the key issue and we are obliged to do this under EU Law. That's the bottom line

Trees and forests sequester CO2 for a relatively short time - say 200 years. A bog stores CO2 for thousands of years. Therefore bogs are actually more important than forests from a CO2 sequestration point of view - MUCH more important.

When a tree dies, it slowly releases methane and CO2 (both greenhouse gases) but over a long period or, if it is burned, it releases CO2 very rapidly. Overall though burning wood is basically carbon neutral if trees burned for fuel are replaced (at a rate of 10 saplings for 1 mature tree approx).

But a bog is different purely because of its scale and the time it stores CO2. If one tree dies its no big deal but if a bog is drained the damage is done to an enormous area of bog. Potentially hundreds or even thousands of hectares of bog can cease to function as a carbon sink if they are drained. A bog is like a huge carbon absorbing machine. If its stays wet and alive it works perfectly. If it drained, you basically turn off this CO2 absorption machine.

When you drain a bog it ceases to sequester carbon and starts to release it on a huge, truly huge scale. A bog being drained for a couple of years, soon passes the point of no return after which it cannot sequester CO2 any further and it then release thousands of years of CO2 on a truly biblical scale.

Is this so difficult to understand?

oppenheimer1

Turf cutting is something I know all too much about, having lifted turf on our family bank for over 20 years. Quite frankly much of the stuff posted here about urban pen pushers knowing nothing about rural life is utter nonsense.

Domestic turf cutting is no longer a back breaking process (lifting is hard work granted)and turf is only cut by hand as a demonstration for tourists. This image below does not happen any more, that era has long since passed - despite the bullshit Ming and co peddle.



In reality, modern turf cutting is like this :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OKqCog5m5Yo

As you can see, the modern method is a highly mechanised unsympathetic process, that extracts (not "cuts") peat on an industrial scale. This process strips the bogs back to the underlying bedrock. The habitats are destroyed. Much more damage is done to the bog than the old process of cutting by hand btw.

The idea that it is also the poor sod (forgive the pun) that is suffering because of the ban on cutting turf on a tiny percentage of bogs is also a falsehood. The people really suffering from a ban are the contractors who have invested heavily in extraction/exploitation machinery, who failed to realise that extraction was due to end ten years ago.

The idea that rural Ireland can indeed look after the countryside is also a falsehood. One only has to look at the legacy of the boom with housing estates in fields miles away from any amenities and the proliferation of one off housing of a totally inappropriate design scarring our countryside. Rural Ireland has shown itself to completely uninterested in a sustainable way of life an is indeed the epitome of the "for me, now" culture. In fact the actions of the turf cutters have gone beyond that, by breaking the law they have now gone beyond just being merely uninterested in sustainability, but now have contempt for it (and the law).

As a person who grew up in and loves the countryside, it saddens me to say that.

ecocoop

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Turf cutting is something I know all too much about, having lifted turf on our family bank for over 20 years.

The idea that rural Ireland can indeed look after the countryside is also a falsehood. One only has to look at the legacy of the boom with housing estates in fields miles away from any amenities and the proliferation of one off housing of a totally inappropriate design scarring our countryside. Rural Ireland has shown itself to completely uninterested in a sustainable way of life an is indeed the epitome of the "for me, now" culture. In fact the actions of the turf cutters have gone beyond that, by breaking the law they have now gone beyond just being merely uninterested in sustainability, but now have contempt for it (and the law).

As a person who grew up in and loves the countryside, it saddens me to say that.

Yes, sadly you are quite right. The hatred that many rural Irish people feel towards the land is a truly sociological phenomena.

The traditional Celtic concept of balance and integrity within nature has been extinguished by the final cultural victory of the Anglo Saxon jackboot of imperialism. We have adopted the worst excesses of our traditional enemies and whilst the UK is desperately trying to find its roots again, Ireland seems to be intent on cheering on the communal gang rape of poor old Mother Ireland.

See http://www.ecocoop.org/ireland/bogs/vid2.htm

Rasheed

Don't bite my head off now, because I don't know, but what are we minding the bogs for?

antoobrien

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

What are you talking about? Raised bogs that are still active, and capable of regenerating themselves, are to have cutting ceased so as to prevent them from becoming irreparably damaged.

What am I talking about - the bit on bold is not necessary. It's the typical knee jerk reaction of the environmental lobby that don't have a f*cking clue - full stop! It's a bit like listening to the debunked study that claimed livestock agriculture was as big a cause of CO2 emissions as transport (supported by the transport industry - go figure)

In the meantime the lack of cultivation (not to say destructive digging) of bogs will undermine the flora & habitats in the bogs - the reason that the bogs are being protected in the first place.

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

In reality, modern turf cutting is like this :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OKqCog5m5Yo

Funnily enough it's methods like this that the authorities want to see proceed because the "sausage machines" that take a number of small furrows and lay out the turf in rows are blamed for collapsing bogs. That makes the use of excavators, no matter how unattractive the prospect, the only practical option for extracting turf - and the desired approach for the authorities.

It also has the effect of increasing the numbers of the traditional bog hole (a big ditch that looks like a canal) - another apparently desired effect of the policies being taken by the authorities.

Uriel.

antoobrien wrote: »

What am I talking about - the bit on bold is not necessary. It's the typical knee jerk reaction of the environmental lobby that don't have a f*cking clue - full stop!

So you are saying science is wrong and you are right? BTW, there is no knee jerk reaction this has been well signaled for over 2 decades

Funnily enough it's methods like this that the authorities want to see proceed because the "sausage machines" that take a number of small furrows and lay out the turf in rows are blamed for collapsing bogs. That makes the use of excavators, no matter how unattractive the prospect, the only practical option for extracting turf - and the desired approach for the authorities.

It also has the effect of increasing the numbers of the traditional bog hole (a big ditch that looks like a canal) - another apparently desired effect of the policies being taken by the authorities.

Which Policies and whose are they ?
Slean cutting on these sites is bad for conservation
HiMac/Hopper cutting is worse
Sausage Machine cutting is worse again.

Just because sausage machine cutting was tackled first, doesn't mean to say that the policy was that all the other methods were/are fine.

I would argue that the State tackled sausage machine cutting on these sites back in 1999, they brought in an illegal derogation of 10 years for other types of cutting to make it a more palatable approach (politically and for cutters) with the intention that cutting would be phased out over that period and giving people time to make alternative arrangements

antoobrien

Uriel. wrote: »

So you are saying science is wrong and you are right? BTW, there is no knee jerk reaction this has been well signaled for over 2 decades

Show us the science that says a full stop is the way to go then.

Btw the decision was made 2 decades ago (or whenever the poet currently residing in the aras made it) to stop cutting. Not this or last year, but whenever the EU law was brought in, so yeah knee jerk describes it.

Uriel.

antoobrien wrote: »

Show us the science that says a full stop is the way to go then.

Btw the decision was made 2 decades ago (or whenever the poet currently residing in the aras made it) to stop cutting. Not this or last year, but whenever the EU law was brought in, so yeah knee jerk describes it.

Google the Fernandez report which shows the effect of turf cutting and its associated works on the active raised bog habitat - npws.ie

Your last paragraph makes no sense to me.

antoobrien

Uriel. wrote: »

Google the Fernandez report which shows the effect of turf cutting and its associated works on the active raised bog habitat

So you'll hide behind science (which can be wrong - see the climate models that predict severe global warming, but not explain your POV.

Tell me, how much bog cotton do you see on uncultivated bogs? f**k all because it requires turf to be cut. All you see is gorse (because it displaces other flora). Now if the bog cotton and other similar flora die out will the "conservation" effort have worked?

Uriel. wrote: »

- npws.ie

Yeah the npws know best :rolleyes: Their conservation efforts (stopping drainage aimed at preventing summer flooding) have decimated some wildlife along the Shannon river.

Uriel. wrote: »

Your last paragraph makes no sense to me.

If you'd tell me what/where, I might try to clarify.

Uriel.

antoobrien wrote: »

So you'll hide behind science (which can be wrong - see the climate models that predict severe global warming, but not explain your POV.

Tell me, how much bog cotton do you see on uncultivated bogs? f**k all because it requires turf to be cut. All you see is gorse (because it displaces other flora). Now if the bog cotton and other similar flora die out will the "conservation" effort have worked?

Don't confuse protection of flora and fauna generally, with the protection of specific habitats.
The scientific evidence shows that turf cutting on Our Raised Bog SACs has continued to cause damage to the active raised bog habitat present in same. The cause is a mixture of the removal of turf and in particular the drainage in place required for turf cutting to be viable - this drainage is drying out the bog and is causing a decrease in the active raised bog habitat. That's is the key issue in terms of how we abide by European Law on this matter.

Yeah the npws know best :rolleyes: Their conservation efforts (stopping drainage aimed at preventing summer flooding) have decimated some wildlife along the Shannon river.

you are using a news report based on the claims by an IFA negotiator to debunk NPWS? LOL that's ridiculous. The story claims that flooding is caused by the delay in carrying out dredging work due to environmental concerns. Doesn't say what the concerns even are. i don't know myself but perhaps the dredging works would significantly impact on the Pearl Mussell, an endangered priority habitat. Just because works need to be carefully planned before reed beds etc.. are dug up doesn't mean that NPWS are incompetent.

If you'd tell me what/where, I might try to clarify.

Just can't understand what you are saying in that particularly paragraph at all to be honest.

Rasheed

Gardaí and officials of the National Parks & Wildlife Service have moved onto a protected bog in Co Roscommon this afternoon where turf cutting was under way.
Several hundred farmers had been attending at a bog at Corbo, Kilteevan, Co Roscommon, where turf was being cut.
Local farmer Josie Fallon told RTÉ News he had no option but to cut his turf because the Government had refused to compensate him, or offer him a replacement bog.
He said he knew he was in breach of the regulations but he had to cut his own turf for his own family.
Mr Fallon said he had been cutting turf there since 1982 but would stop if he was offered either compensation or a new bog.
Independent TD Luke 'Ming' Flanagan, who was on the bog when the turf was being cut, denied that he was encouraging the breaking of the law.
He said he would not tell any bog owner what to do but he knew the pressure that was on bog owners.
Gardaí and officials are still on the site and turf cutting has now ceased. This is from RTE today.

Ridiculous lads. We were offered a bog 75 miles away from our home. 75 miles? In a tractor, completely out of the question. Fair enough the compensation is alright but with the way oil prices are going, how do we know that the compensation will cover it? I don't think people not living in the country understand how much people rely on turf. It's not for nostalgia, it's necessity.

You can throw all the science you want at me and I understand Ireland will get fined but people will continue to flout the law if a fairer agreement isn't met. We still have not got any reassurance that we will get the compensation, never minded paid it so what are we supposed to do until we do? Put on an extra jumper? No chance. If it comes down to keeping my family warm or breaking the law, I think ye know my answer.

Anna Nicole

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Domestic turf cutting is no longer a back breaking process (lifting is hard work granted)and turf is only cut by hand as a demonstration for tourists. This image below does not happen any more, that era has long since passed - despite the bullshit Ming and co peddle.

As you can see, the modern method is a highly mechanised unsympathetic process, that extracts (not "cuts") peat on an industrial scale. This process strips the bogs back to the underlying bedrock. The habitats are destroyed. Much more damage is done to the bog than the old process of cutting by hand btw.

The idea that it is also the poor sod (forgive the pun) that is suffering because of the ban on cutting turf on a tiny percentage of bogs is also a falsehood. The people really suffering from a ban are the contractors who have invested heavily in extraction/exploitation machinery, who failed to realise that extraction was due to end ten years ago.

You think footing 30 ten sod skips then throwing into a trailer then into a shed isn't back breaking? Also I don't agree with your point that people dont suffer because of the ban, it's the contractors is pure bull. I couldnt give a monkeys about the contractors, I care that my children and elderly parents will be warm in the winter.

Uriel.

Rasheed wrote: »

Gardaí and officials of the National Parks & Wildlife Service have moved onto a protected bog in Co Roscommon this afternoon where turf cutting was under way.
Several hundred farmers had been attending at a bog at Corbo, Kilteevan, Co Roscommon, where turf was being cut.
Local farmer Josie Fallon told RTÉ News he had no option but to cut his turf because the Government had refused to compensate him, or offer him a replacement bog.
He said he knew he was in breach of the regulations but he had to cut his own turf for his own family.
Mr Fallon said he had been cutting turf there since 1982 but would stop if he was offered either compensation or a new bog.
Independent TD Luke 'Ming' Flanagan, who was on the bog when the turf was being cut, denied that he was encouraging the breaking of the law.
He said he would not tell any bog owner what to do but he knew the pressure that was on bog owners.
Gardaí and officials are still on the site and turf cutting has now ceased. This is from RTE today.

Ridiculous lads. We were offered a bog 75 miles away from our home. 75 miles? In a tractor, completely out of the question. Fair enough the compensation is alright but with the way oil prices are going, how do we know that the compensation will cover it? I don't think people not living in the country understand how much people rely on turf. It's not for nostalgia, it's necessity.

You can throw all the science you want at me and I understand Ireland will get fined but people will continue to flout the law if a fairer agreement isn't met. We still have not got any reassurance that we will get the compensation, never minded paid it so what are we supposed to do until we do? Put on an extra jumper? No chance. If it comes down to keeping my family warm or breaking the law, I think ye know my answer.

This thing of "putting on an extra jumper" is pure bullcrap. Have you actually been formally offered another bog "75 miles" away or is the State still looking for you?

And as I am sure you know, the State has agreed to supply you with turf delivered to your door until such a time that a suitable alternative is found. So there is no need to cut turf illegally and likewise there is no need for an extra jumper.

The Government have already started delivering turf:
http://www.tuamherald.ie/2012/06/06/landmark-day-as-first-%E2%80%98bog-swap%E2%80%99-turf-arrives-in-ballinlass/

Uriel.

Anna Nicole wrote: »

You think footing 30 ten sod skips then throwing into a trailer then into a shed isn't back breaking? Also I don't agree with your point that people dont suffer because of the ban, it's the contractors is pure bull. I couldnt give a monkeys about the contractors, I care that my children and elderly parents will be warm in the winter.

Then avail of the compensation or look for relocation. You'll get a supply of turf until a suitable new bog is found.

http://www.tuamherald.ie/2012/06/06/landmark-day-as-first-%E2%80%98bog-swap%E2%80%99-turf-arrives-in-ballinlass/

http://www.npws.ie/peatlandsturf-cutting/turfcutting/

antoobrien

Uriel. wrote: »

Don't confuse protection of flora and fauna generally, with the protection of specific habitats.

I'm not - it's part of the issue here. The protection of, among others, rare heather plants for example that will be overgrown by bog gorse, which has a nasty tendency to supplant other flora in bogs when turf isn't actively being cut (because those pesky humans tend to control it while they're tryng to get at the turf).

Uriel. wrote: »

The scientific evidence

What scientific evidence? The report that you mention, but don't quote? If you're going attempt to justify your position with "evidence" produce it.

Uriel. wrote: »

you are using a news report based on the claims by an IFA negotiator to debunk NPWS? LOL that's ridiculous.

No more ridiculous than believing whatever the npws (a government appointed interest group) spew to make their lives easier. Conservation groups in Ireland have a track record of being heavy handed and ultimately failing in their goals (because they make a mess of it).

If it is not true that the birds mentioned in the article are declining, that their habitats are being reduced because of flooding that's happening due to drainage policies introduced in the interests of "conservation", I'm sure the npws or bird watch ireland will be able to provide a study showing how their numbers are not declining in the areas in question.

As for not understanding this):

antoobrien wrote: »

Btw the decision was made 2 decades ago (or whenever the poet currently residing in the aras made it) to stop cutting. Not this or last year, but whenever the EU law was brought in, so yeah knee jerk describes it.

IIRC the original legistation was published by Michael D (the poet in the aras) while he was minister in arts culture and gaeltacht before he left office (or it could've been dev óg). It was enacted a couple of years later by FF .

The decision to fully stop cutting turf in the areas (as opposed to tiher forms of conservation) was made then, when the EU told us we had to put the laws into place (i.e. the 90s). The fact that the urban population have only heard about this recently does not change the fact hat it was always a knee jerk decision.

I'm wondering when they will just tell us to stop cutting turf in any bog.

Anna Nicole

Uriel. wrote: »

Then avail of the compensation or look for relocation. You'll get a supply of turf until a suitable new bog is found.

http://www.tuamherald.ie/2012/06/06/landmark-day-as-first-%E2%80%98bog-swap%E2%80%99-turf-arrives-in-ballinlass/

http://www.npws.ie/peatlandsturf-cutting/turfcutting/

Would you know good turf from bad turf? Well I do. Bad turf will not heat the home well enough therefore you will use more and go through your load faster swell as destroying your chimney. My friend got turf delivered and you would be swell burning cow dung. The government makes a big deal of this delivering turf so they look great to all the people that have nothing to do with bogs but his load was the worst quality crap I ever had the displeasure of handling.

Rasheed

Uriel. wrote: »

This thing of "putting on an extra jumper" is pure bullcrap. Have you actually been formally offered another bog "75 miles" away or is the State still looking for you?

And as I am sure you know, the State has agreed to supply you with turf delivered to your door until such a time that a suitable alternative is found. So there is no need to cut turf illegally and likewise there is no need for an extra jumper.

The Government have already started delivering turf:
http://www.tuamherald.ie/2012/06/06/landmark-day-as-first-%E2%80%98bog-swap%E2%80%99-turf-arrives-in-ballinlass/

Well I'm hardly going to make up that the government offered us a bog 75 miles away so to answer your question, yes they formally offered us said bog and told us that there was no nearer bog available. Is your problem with turf cutting the fines from Europe or the carbon releasing etc?

joela

Rasheed wrote: »

Gardaí and officials of the National Parks & Wildlife Service have moved onto a protected bog in Co Roscommon this afternoon where turf cutting was under way.
Several hundred farmers had been attending at a bog at Corbo, Kilteevan, Co Roscommon, where turf was being cut.
Local farmer Josie Fallon told RTÉ News he had no option but to cut his turf because the Government had refused to compensate him, or offer him a replacement bog.
He said he knew he was in breach of the regulations but he had to cut his own turf for his own family.
Mr Fallon said he had been cutting turf there since 1982 but would stop if he was offered either compensation or a new bog.
Independent TD Luke 'Ming' Flanagan, who was on the bog when the turf was being cut, denied that he was encouraging the breaking of the law.
He said he would not tell any bog owner what to do but he knew the pressure that was on bog owners.
Gardaí and officials are still on the site and turf cutting has now ceased. This is from RTE today.

Ridiculous lads. We were offered a bog 75 miles away from our home. 75 miles? In a tractor, completely out of the question. Fair enough the compensation is alright but with the way oil prices are going, how do we know that the compensation will cover it? I don't think people not living in the country understand how much people rely on turf. It's not for nostalgia, it's necessity.

You can throw all the science you want at me and I understand Ireland will get fined but people will continue to flout the law if a fairer agreement isn't met. We still have not got any reassurance that we will get the compensation, never minded paid it so what are we supposed to do until we do? Put on an extra jumper? No chance. If it comes down to keeping my family warm or breaking the law, I think ye know my answer.

The answer is use the compensation to establish another form of heating, retrofit your house for energy efficiency and shut up whinging. You had more than 10 years to figure something out. Shower of me feiners

ecocoop

Are you lot aware that Compensation is not normally paid when areas in Europe are designated as a SAC or SPA?

In the UK, bogland is designated as SACs and that is it. Landowner has to abide by the law or get fined (and worse).

In the UK, landowners are considered the privileged classes. In Ireland, they have perfected the art of the POOR MOUTH so we are supposed to feel sorry because a bunch of rich farmers have to obey the law.

I would chuck em all in prison for a few weeks and seize their land.

Bloody crocodile tears!

ecocoop

Rasheed wrote: »

Well I'm hardly going to make up that the government offered us a bog 75 miles away so to answer your question, yes they formally offered us said bog and told us that there was no nearer bog available. Is your problem with turf cutting the fines from Europe or the carbon releasing etc?

There's loads of grants available for insulation and fitting wood central heating systems. Just apply for them and stop the pathetic moaning - man up there ya bunch of losers.

IrishHomer

Folks heads up its going to be discussed on RTE Primetime tonight.

ecocoop

If we did what these turf cutters and Mingites wanted, we would leave the EU and sink back into our mud-caked stone-age 1950s poverty again. Oh wouldn't that be so wonderful and nostalgic - to walk down O'Connel Street again and see hundreds of shoeless, poverty-stricken kids dig through 10 foot high stinking piles of rags dumped by the red-cross.

Ah for the smell of boiled cabbage on Sunday!

pollagh prince

its very obvious that the people that are against this are very far removed from real rural ireland....medium-upper class pen pushing yuppies, who drive around in their large SUVs!

ecocoop

pollagh prince wrote: »

its very obvious that the people that are against this are very far removed from real rural ireland....medium-upper class pen pushing yuppies, who drive around in their large SUVs!

Well I live in the west of Ireland, I'm a farmer and I have a battered Ford. Oh and I want to see the Bogs protected.

And, BTW, I am fed up of Ming the Motormouth as well!

pollagh prince

dont believe u. you are the first rural person i have met that has said this!

Uriel.

antoobrien wrote: »

I'm not - it's part of the issue here. The protection of, among others, rare heather plants for example that will be overgrown by bog gorse, which has a nasty tendency to supplant other flora in bogs when turf isn't actively being cut (because those pesky humans tend to control it while they're tryng to get at the turf).

Are these rare heather plants a protected habitat? If they are, then they are most likely to be protected elsewhere either in Ireland and or other EU countries. If they are not protected habitats, then I would question their rarity. Turf cutting has to stop on 53 bogs, because they represent the last of the bogs that have decent quality active raised habitat remaining. You can't jsut pick another bog to designate instead, because the habitat is so rare. There are over 1,500 other bogs in Ireland alone where cutting may proceed as it has done. I am sure heather plants can be well represented there.

What scientific evidence? The report that you mention, but don't quote? If you're going attempt to justify your position with "evidence" produce it.

Fernandez et al... Ten different turf cutting cessation options are explored and assessed within this report. Nine of these
options are new and go from those proposing the immediate complete cessation of cutting at all sites to
those where cessation at the individual plot level is considered. The remaining option is to continue with the
current cessation policy. The first nine options assumed that cutting in designated sites will be phased out,
at the latest, within 10 years of the 2004 Agreement (i.e. 2013). The option of immediate cessation of turf Document 1 - Summary Report - Assessment of impacts of turf cutting on designated Raised Bogs 2003-06
cutting on all SACs and NHAs is recommended as the most appropriate from a nature conservation
perspective. The phasing out approach proposed by other options or a continuation with current policy will
involve further losses of priority habitat in the medium term and a permanent significant decrease of the
potential to restore such habitats. Although this option will result in the highest short term economic cost,
all the other options have similar or larger economic costs in the medium term.

Fernandez et al... A total of 48 designated raised bogs, either SACs or NHAs, which were described and mapped ten years previously
and thus represented a baseline against which change could be measured, were selected and surveyed as part of this
study. These sites also represented the natural range of this ecosystem present in Ireland.
This study has shown that the extent of active peat forming, priority habitats (Active Raised Bog habitat and Bog
Woodland) has declined by 36.80% (580.61ha) in the period 1995-2004/5 and that the overall conservation status of
Active Raised bog habitat is ‘Unfavourable bad’. It also indicated that the extent of Degraded Raised Bog has
increased at the expense of Active Raised Bog. Indeed the future prospects of Degraded Raised Bog habitat were
poor and thus the overall habitat conservation status was deemed ‘Unfavourable inadequate’. This is particularly
due to the fact that peat cutting is directly diminishing the extent of the latter habitat.
The study confirms that peat cutting combined with drainage and burning are the most negatively impacting
activities on the raised bogs surveyed. In addition, it was also found that these activities area highly interrelated.

it's a huge report, I am not going to supply anymore quotes from same, read it yourself. I note that you have not provided one scrap of evidence to support any claim that you make.

No more ridiculous than believing whatever the npws (a government appointed interest group) spew to make their lives easier. Conservation groups in Ireland have a track record of being heavy handed and ultimately failing in their goals (because they make a mess of it).

hmmmm ok, and landowner/turf cutters are not a vested interest group that will spew whatever they like... suuuuure.

If it is not true that the birds mentioned in the article are declining, that their habitats are being reduced because of flooding that's happening due to drainage policies introduced in the interests of "conservation", I'm sure the npws or bird watch ireland will be able to provide a study showing how their numbers are not declining in the areas in question.

Show me YOUR evidence. if you don't have it, that's fine, I actually don't expect you to have it, but that's where the debate ends I am afraid.

As for not understanding this):


IIRC the original legistation was published by Michael D (the poet in the aras) while he was minister in arts culture and gaeltacht before he left office (or it could've been dev óg). It was enacted a couple of years later by FF .

The decision to fully stop cutting turf in the areas (as opposed to tiher forms of conservation) was made then, when the EU told us we had to put the laws into place (i.e. the 90s). The fact that the urban population have only heard about this recently does not change the fact hat it was always a knee jerk decision.

I'm wondering when they will just tell us to stop cutting turf in any bog.

It is clear from the evidence that turf cutting and conservation on these sites do not go hand in hand. The Directive was passed in 1992, Ireland delayed 5 years in adopting it, in 1999 a ten year derogation was brought in (an illegal derogation mind you). We have been failing to protect this habitat and comply with European law since 1997 (arguably even 1992), that's at least 15 years, if not 20, of failure to deal with the issue. That is not a knee jerk reaction

Uriel.

pollagh prince wrote: »

its very obvious that the people that are against this are very far removed from real rural ireland....medium-upper class pen pushing yuppies, who drive around in their large SUVs!

Even if that was true, and it's not for me anyway... what is that opposed to ?

joela

Well I am a farmers daughter, grew up milking cows, cutting silage the lot. I want to see the bogs protected, farmers had to comply with environmental legislation determining when and what they can do on their land a long time ago. Why should it be any different for turf cutters? People who agree with Ming & his ilk are thinking very short-term, if they continue then there will be no future for any of us. We need nature to survive & if we continue to cut, burn, pollute and waste it then it will be gone.

ecocoop

pollagh prince wrote: »

dont believe u. you are the first rural person i have met that has said this!

My heart is broken!

Uriel.

Anna Nicole wrote: »

Would you know good turf from bad turf? Well I do. Bad turf will not heat the home well enough therefore you will use more and go through your load faster swell as destroying your chimney. My friend got turf delivered and you would be swell burning cow dung. The government makes a big deal of this delivering turf so they look great to all the people that have nothing to do with bogs but his load was the worst quality crap I ever had the displeasure of handling.

Yes I do know good turf from bad actually. You're dead right, poor turf won't properly heat a home.

You have handled the turf delivered by the Government? Where did you get it?

runawaybishop

People took money to stop doing something and then went ahead and did it anyway - all the ****eing on about the bogs importance to rural life doesnt change this.

Anna Nicole

Uriel. wrote: »

Yes I do know good turf from bad actually. You're dead right, poor turf won't properly heat a home.

You have handled the turf delivered by the Government? Where did you get it?

Leitrim. Right if we stop cutting turf, we can't pray for divine heat so we'll have to start cutting down trees. Then wait for the hippies to start their histrionics

ecocoop

Anna Nicole wrote: »

Leitrim. Right if we stop cutting turf, we can't pray for divine heat so we'll have to start cutting down trees. Then wait for the hippies to start their histrionics

Let me explain something to you. Trees can be planted and harvested. This means that when you cut them down you can also plant new ones. This practice is called forestry.

Its quite different from cutting turf - which is basically a form of final destruction - often called environmental vandalism.

ecocoop

ecocoop wrote: »

Let me explain something to you. Trees can be planted and harvested. This means that when you cut them down you can also plant new ones. This practice is called forestry.

Its quite different from cutting turf - which is basically a form of final destruction - often called environmental vandalism.

What did happen, in the end, to the Irish druids? Are they still there? Maybe they can come and rescue us from our own self-destruction.

Rasheed

Bear in mind that the State owns 92% of these bogs and 1 acre will last domestic cutters approx 300 years effectively giving us our own little oil well & fuel security. Thus avoiding another problem in Ireland at the moment fuel poverty. TCCA.

Hardly going to destroy every bit of bog we've left lads. Seriously.

ecocoop

Rasheed wrote: »

Bear in mind that the State owns 92% of these bogs and 1 acre will last domestic cutters approx 300 years effectively giving us our own little oil well & fuel security. Thus avoiding another problem in Ireland at the moment fuel poverty. TCCA.

Hardly going to destroy every bit of bog we've left lads. Seriously.

Rasheed, you really are seriously deluded. Sorry to be hard on you man but .......Bogs cease to function when they are drained beyond a certain point.

The ETD for raised SAC bogs at the present rate of explotation is about another 9 years, in Ireland, in general - after which they will just die from the drainage already in place anyway.

Is that what we really want?

ecocoop

Rasheed wrote: »

Bear in mind that the State owns 92% of these bogs and 1 acre will last domestic cutters approx 300 years effectively giving us our own little oil well & fuel security. Thus avoiding another problem in Ireland at the moment fuel poverty. TCCA.

Hardly going to destroy every bit of bog we've left lads. Seriously.

Sorry and BTW we are entering a period of extreme climate alteration as you may have noticed.. floods and droughts ...... Bogs stop both phenomena.

For God's sake, we have to save these bogs now if we are to have any chance for our kids to live in Ireland in the next 70 years.