Commonage/hill farmers issues thread, GLAS, GAEC, etc etc

Birdnuts

rangler1 wrote: »

All intensive farmers work harder at protecting water quality and environment than any tree hugger, I can tell you and if you travel through the countryside, intensively farmed land is a lot more scenic than badly farmed.
Maybe Connemara etc looks well, but I don't appreciate it, but to me the varying colours in the fields through Wexford, Carlow laoise and counties like it is as good as you get any where

Who mentioned treehuggers?? - I'm taking about the areas that are the head waters for most of our water supplies and the main tourist areas in the country which are primarily in areas of poorer soils and uplands. It is in the interests of the Irish public that these areas are protected and maintained by the local farming community.

tanko

rangler1 wrote: »

All intensive farmers work harder at protecting water quality and environment than any tree hugger, I can tell you and if you travel through the countryside, intensively farmed land is a lot more scenic than badly farmed.
Maybe Connemara etc looks well, but I don't appreciate it, but to me the varying colours in the fields through Wexford, Carlow laoise and counties like it is as good as you get any where

The IFA should be renamed the Leinster Farmers Association.

rangler1

Birdnuts wrote: »

Who mentioned treehuggers?? - I'm taking about the areas that are the head waters for most of our water supplies and the main tourist areas in the country which are primarily in areas of poorer soils and uplands. It is in the interests of the Irish public that these areas are protected and maintained by the local farming community.

That's what I said, we work harder at protecting water quality than anyone, and intensive farmers work harder at it than extensive...billions have been spent by farmers on protecting water quality

rangler1

tanko wrote: »

The IFA should be renamed the Leinster Farmers Association.

just happens to be the areas I go through on the way to Camolin, lovely to see tasty farmers

Birdnuts

rangler1 wrote: »

That's what I said, we work harder at protecting water quality than anyone, and intensive farmers work harder at it than extensive...billions have been spent by farmers on protecting water quality

I'm well aware of the investments made across the industry in this area but the environmental constraints,climate and other factors on poorer soils and hill land are very different from the good quality mineral soils in the low lands in terms of run-off risks, nutrient loss, buffering ability etc.

Zoo4m8

Capercaille wrote: »

The most intensive farmers are.

What?

MayoAreMagic

One thing jumps out at me in reading the last few pages. We hill farmers seem to be placing a lot of eggs in the environment and tourism basket. I mean, bigger picture, we need to be working towards something more than being a group of glorified lawnmowers for European tourists... Couldn't they just get some wild goats to do the job instead and save a fortune? You have to ask, how much value are we actually adding there? Is that something that can be relied upon in the future? What kind of margin are you going to get from that?

This ethos of chasing payments is a dangerous one. We need to be offering something more if we want it to have a genuine future. If we put all this effort into market development and product improvement for our lamb, hill farming would be in a healthier place. That is the real issue, our produce isn't recognised. It is instead shoe-horned into the markets of lowland lamb. That is where we are falling down. Now of course this issue is important, and people are right to fight it, but you have to keep an eye on the bigger picture also. If we want to make hill farming sustainable then we cant be relying on the need to keep the heather down on the hills...

rangler1

Still no concessions after 2 meetings yesterday

''IFA Hill Committee Chairman Pat Dunne said that more flexibility on commonages has been secured following a meeting between IFA and Minister for Agriculture Simon Coveney yesterday.

Pat Dunne said that one of the big concerns for hill farmers under the new GLAS rules was that plans might not be completed for farmers to join the scheme. IFA got a commitment from the Minister that the Commonage Implementation Committee will intervene in such cases and get Planners to do the Plan. This plan will in turn allow commonage shareholders to partake in the GLAS scheme and secure must needed support.

In relation to commonages that have difficulty in achieving the 50% management agreement, IFA has insisted that the Implementation Committee will allow these farmers in the new GLAS scheme.

At the meeting, Pat Dunne told Minister Coveney that the priority was to get the GLAS scheme open immediately so that farmers have ample time to apply.

In relation to the minimum stocking level for Pillar I payments the Minister confirmed that the EU Commission have ruled out setting any limit. This means that the 0.1lu/ha will not apply for SFP Pillar I payment on marginal and commonage land in 2015.''

Connemara Farmer

http://www.agriland.ie/news/minister-accused-discrimination-hill-farmers/

Connemara Farmer

MayoAreMagic wrote: »

One thing jumps out at me in reading the last few pages. We hill farmers seem to be placing a lot of eggs in the environment and tourism basket.

Is your land designated?

supersean1999

rangler1 wrote: »

Still no concessions after 2 meetings yesterday

''IFA Hill Committee Chairman Pat Dunne said that more flexibility on commonages has been secured following a meeting between IFA and Minister for Agriculture Simon Coveney yesterday.

Pat Dunne said that one of the big concerns for hill farmers under the new GLAS rules was that plans might not be completed for farmers to join the scheme. IFA got a commitment from the Minister that the Commonage Implementation Committee will intervene in such cases and get Planners to do the Plan. This plan will in turn allow commonage shareholders to partake in the GLAS scheme and secure must needed support.

In relation to commonages that have difficulty in achieving the 50% management agreement, IFA has insisted that the Implementation Committee will allow these farmers in the new GLAS scheme.

At the meeting, Pat Dunne told Minister Coveney that the priority was to get the GLAS scheme open immediately so that farmers have ample time to apply.

In relation to the minimum stocking level for Pillar I payments the Minister confirmed that the EU Commission have ruled out setting any limit. This means that the 0.1lu/ha will not apply for SFP Pillar I payment on marginal and commonage land in 2015.''

Did pat dunne ask the question. What is the point in having 50% collective agreement if the committee will allow everyone in. Sure that makes no sense. Seems a valid question anyone should ask.

Connemara Farmer

supersean1999 wrote: »

Did pat dunne ask the question. What is the point in having 50% collective agreement if the committee will allow everyone in. Sure that makes no sense. Seems a valid question anyone should ask.

Collective agreement isn't meant to achieve anything. It's there as a roadblock to discourage farmers from entering. Think about it, 50% agreement means 50% also don't agree and do their own thing, which will have fluctuating repercussions for the 50%. That's without getting into rogue trader territory. It's a nonsense.

supersean1999

Connemara Farmer wrote: »

Collective agreement isn't meant to achieve anything. It's there as a roadblock to discourage farmers from entering. Think about it, 50% agreement means 50% also don't agree and do their own thing, which will have fluctuating repercussions for the 50%. That's without getting into rogue trader territory. It's a nonsense.

I agree.

Farmer Pudsey

I imagine that the 50% agreement is there to force one set of commomage owners to police the rest. It may also be a road block to reduce GLAS numbers. From the Indo last Tuesday the EU seems unhappy with the government support of those that farming restrictions are put on. It also seems unhappy that Pillar 2 money is being used to direct support farmers suckler headage etc.

It was also interesting to see that the EU were unhappy with funding being limited by no of HA for the like of commonage and hen harrier etc. this may force a radical rethink by the Dept on GLAS. There would seem to be a lot to play for here yet for those effected by envoirmental restrictions .

rangler1

Connemara Farmer wrote: »

Collective agreement isn't meant to achieve anything. It's there as a roadblock to discourage farmers from entering. Think about it, 50% agreement means 50% also don't agree and do their own thing, which will have fluctuating repercussions for the 50%. That's without getting into rogue trader territory. It's a nonsense.

You probably have something there, a friend whose a TD told me when we were looking for matching funding that there was more needier cases for money and we wouldn't get it.
On talking to him after getting the commitment, he just said ''we'll see''.
I don't see much in GLAS for any one, so it mightn't cost them that much after

Connemara Farmer

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

I imagine that the 50% agreement is there to force one set of commomage owners to police the rest. It may also be a road block to reduce GLAS numbers. From the Indo last Tuesday the EU seems unhappy with the government support of those that farming restrictions are put on. It also seems unhappy that Pillar 2 money is being used to direct support farmers suckler headage etc.

It was also interesting to see that the EU were unhappy with funding being limited by no of HA for the like of commonage and hen harrier etc. this may force a radical rethink by the Dept on GLAS. There would seem to be a lot to play for here yet for those effected by envoirmental restrictions .

I have been relegated to using my phone as laptop charger broke.

Policing is a very complex situation. I know of very complex socially embarrassing situations between farmers, where one is obviously forced into a submissive situation by the other. Both know the "victim" will have his stock destroyed if the status quo is challenged. While the aggressor does as he pleases ignoring the rights of the other farmer.

That instance goes beyond livlihood, so how the Dept imagines policing to work i.e. that farmer a picks up the phone and reports farmer b won't happen. Farmer a knows his position is to unsafe given the sparsely populated areas his stock graze, he is vulnerable to retribution in many ways from any farmer believing unfairly that he's entitled to have it all.

We are working on something at the moment that MAY provide a practical solution to the problem.

Would agree there is a lot to play for. How that will pan out, I don't know. What I do know and believe is doing nothing, being fatalistic, or subservient only gets one bent over.

rangler1

Connemara Farmer wrote: »

I have been relegated to using my phone as laptop charger broke.

Policing is a very complex situation. I know of very complex socially embarrassing situations between farmers, where one is obviously forced into a submissive situation by the other. Both know the "victim" will have his stock destroyed if the status quo is challenged. While the aggressor does as he pleases ignoring the rights of the other farmer.

That instance goes beyond livlihood, so how the Dept imagines policing to work i.e. that farmer a picks up the phone and reports farmer b won't happen. Farmer a knows his position is to unsafe given the sparsely populated areas his stock graze, he is vulnerable to retribution in many ways from any farmer believing unfairly that he's entitled to have it all.

We are working on something at the moment that MAY provide a practical solution to the problem.

Would agree there is a lot to play for. How that will pan out, I don't know. What I do know and believe is doing nothing, being fatalistic, or subservient only gets one bent over.

This is your first ''campaign'' I'd say, you too will get punch drunk and war weary, but you need the people that's hurting to be involved as they'll be blooded for a fight

Connemara Farmer

Good crowd at today's march in Castlebar from McHale park to Enda Kennys constituency office.

Speakers included Dara Calleary (FF TD Mayo) Eamon O'Cuiv (FF Ag Spokesman), Michael Holmes (Ind Mayo Councillor), Marian Harkin (Ind MEP), Matt Carthy (SF MEP), Luke "Ming" Flanagan (Ind MEP), Martin Gavin, John Moran, Brendan Joyce, Colm O'Donnell.

Also in attendance Charlie McConalogue (FF TD), Trevor Ó Clochartaigh (SF Senator), Rose Conway Walsh (SF Mayo Councillor) and others I'm sure I didn't spot.


One "off topic" thing I noticed today, from me talking directly to people and from conversations recounted afterwards, there's a distinct whiff of an election around, someones smelling blood in the water. I'm not exactly sure why, but there was a definite buzz of it.

supersean1999

Conn why do you think most of the names above were there. VOTES. Ireland will never change.

ganmo

http://www.npws.ie/legislationandconventions/Public%20Consultation%20Section%2040.pdf

they're reviewing the law governing the burning/cutting of bushes and are looking for the public views on it.

Connemara Farmer

supersean1999 wrote: »

Conn why do you think most of the names above were there. VOTES. Ireland will never change.

It's a political issue Sean, of course politicians will be at these things.

Capercaille

ganmo wrote: »

http://www.npws.ie/legislationandconventions/Public%20Consultation%20Section%2040.pdf

they're reviewing the law governing the burning/cutting of bushes and are looking for the public views on it.

Danger that review could result in blanket exemption destroying our biodiversity. People will be able to cut when they like.

ganmo

Capercaille wrote: »

Danger that review could result in blanket exemption destroying our biodiversity. People will be able to cut when they like.

Its all about the balance, burning on mid summers day would be madness for safety reasons alone! but i wonder what studies or research they based the current season on?

Capercaille

ganmo wrote: »

Its all about the balance, burning on mid summers day would be madness for safety reasons alone! but i wonder what studies or research they based the current season on?

They don't listen to research/studies. In relation to the turf cutting ban on SAC/NHA they just disregarded all scientific research and de-designated a raft of NHA's and sat by like retards when people continued cutting on raised bog SAC's. They will do what the populist thing to do is.

HillFarmer

Connemara Farmer wrote: »

Good crowd at today's march in Castlebar from McHale park to Enda Kennys constituency office.

Speakers included Dara Calleary (FF TD Mayo) Eamon O'Cuiv (FF Ag Spokesman), Michael Holmes (Ind Mayo Councillor), Marian Harkin (Ind MEP), Matt Carthy (SF MEP), Luke "Ming" Flanagan (Ind MEP), Martin Gavin, John Moran, Brendan Joyce, Colm O'Donnell.

Also in attendance Charlie McConalogue (FF TD), Trevor Ó Clochartaigh (SF Senator), Rose Conway Walsh (SF Mayo Councillor) and others I'm sure I didn't spot.


One "off topic" thing I noticed today, from me talking directly to people and from conversations recounted afterwards, there's a distinct whiff of an election around, someones smelling blood in the water. I'm not exactly sure why, but there was a definite buzz of it.

Fair play to ye lads from down under, delighted to see Hill farmers coming together, its been plain to see there has been no one representing us the last few years, I only hope it doesn't fizzle out and the boys down south will become more invovled

Capercaille

http://michaelcreedfg.wordpress.com/2014/12/04/eu-commission-to-intervene-on-states-failure-to-act-on-hen-harrier-issue/#respond

rangler1

HillFarmer wrote: »

Fair play to ye lads from down under, delighted to see Hill farmers coming together, its been plain to see there has been no one representing us the last few years, I only hope it doesn't fizzle out and the boys down south will become more invovled

I keep telling farmers to get involved, your representation depends solely on the people you elect from the various sectors...ie don't expect farmers on the dairy committee to drive hill issues, I've attended lots of branch meetings where farmers refuse to take positions yet wonder why they're not represented...don't know if it's cleverness or what (I won't do the work if someone else'll do it for me attitude). They used to say that BSE was short for Blame Someone Else and it's very evident here

Connemara Farmer

Countrywide this morning.

http://www.rte.ie/radio1/podcast/podcast_countrywide.xml

supersean1999

To me the ifa seem happy with the 50%

Connemara Farmer

HillFarmer wrote: »

Fair play to ye lads from down under, delighted to see Hill farmers coming together, its been plain to see there has been no one representing us the last few years, I only hope it doesn't fizzle out and the boys down south will become more invovled

There are more fights coming down along the line, land eligibility, review of CAP, review of DAS/ANC, for those reasons I don't expect it to fizzle out. Probably others that haven't yet registered on the radar too.

There may be a few eyes opened after the fact if the correct deal isn't delivered for hill/commonage/marginal land farmers, because the pocket book will start hurting.

One could read as sinister or inept some of the regulations being shoehorned into those farmers livelihoods.

rangler1

supersean1999 wrote: »

To me the ifa seem happy with the 50%

I don't know .....It's your guys that are on the hill committee, ask them

Connemara Farmer

rangler1 wrote: »

I don't know .....It's your guys that are on the hill committee, ask them

Hope you will be supporting the motion that came from our branch to give the HC proper and full standing at National Council, inc vote.

50% Q needs to be asked farther up the food chain, I know the answer but others need to find that info for themselves.

Connemara Farmer

Seems the Minister is considering the 12 point plan Hill farmers For Action submitted Wednesday.

"The Hill Farmers provided the Minister with a submission on their concerns and he undertook to examine the submission and the proposals being put forward. While certain elements of these concerns have already been addressed, their submission is being reviewed further in the context of the threshold for environmental action which must be demonstrated in order to receive GLAS approval at EU level."

http://www.rte.ie/radio1/countrywide/

We'll see what comes of that.

Farmer

Capercaille wrote: »

Danger that review could result in blanket exemption destroying our biodiversity. People will be able to cut when they like.

It's quite simple. All they needed to do was leave this type if of cover eligible for SFP rather than penalizing for it. I saw more potential habitat destroyed last year than in my entire life, just to reclaim lost areas. One department is spending a fortune causing a problem (eligibility appeals are taking up to 18 months to process) that this department will spend another fortune trying to resolve.

Europe and Dublin both need to make up their minds

Connemara Farmer

Just an example below of the type of thing already happening in relation to land eligibility. People can look for updated articles relating to this story, I'm not posting the link below as being the current situation.

http://www.independent.ie/business/farming/eu-parliament-to-pursue-galway-commonage-case-29677943.html

Capercaille

http://www.birdwatch.co.uk/channel/newsitem.asp?cate=__15727
Hen Harriers under forestry threat

Birdnuts

Capercaille wrote: »

http://www.birdwatch.co.uk/channel/newsitem.asp?cate=__15727
Hen Harriers under forestry threat

http://michaelcreedfg.wordpress.com/2014/12/04/eu-commission-to-intervene-on-states-failure-to-act-on-hen-harrier-issue/#respond

Looks like the EU commission is set to intervene in this issue for the benefit of all concerned and ensure that farmers get the proper supports they were promised initially. This adds to the news earlier this week that the EU is not happy with the governments overall handling of funding for GLAS and related schemes.

PS: Its good to see that even among government TDs, the realization that its the Dept and their own government ministers who are primarily responsible for the current mess with regards to these issues.

Birdnuts

Connemara Farmer wrote: »

Just an example below of the type of thing already happening in relation to land eligibility. People can look for updated articles relating to this story, I'm not posting the link below as being the current situation.

http://www.independent.ie/business/farming/eu-parliament-to-pursue-galway-commonage-case-29677943.html

The attitude of this cabal within the Dept to hill/commonage farmers is really despicable. Unless their reigned in I really fear for the future of these farmers. At least it appears they now have the EU on their side in this fight.

Connemara Farmer

http://www.yourcommonage.ie/

Yc.ie has published some of the important questions from the Commission to Dept over rdp draft. They've also given their own evaluation of the situation thus far.

Connemara Farmer

More propaganda from the Minister of Not Our Fault.

http://www.farmersjournal.ie/no-single-dominant-factor-is-the-cause-of-under-grazing-in-commonages-coveney-170514/

30%+ forced destocking without identifying stock carrying capacity of land, no identification of offenders, no updating of Commonage Framework Plans, no meaningful engagement with hill/commonage farmers, can't/won't answer relevant questions.

But it's not their fault....

Capercaille

Birdnuts wrote: »

http://michaelcreedfg.wordpress.com/2014/12/04/eu-commission-to-intervene-on-states-failure-to-act-on-hen-harrier-issue/#respond

Looks like the EU commission is set to intervene in this issue for the benefit of all concerned and ensure that farmers get the proper supports they were promised initially. This adds to the news earlier this week that the EU is not happy with the governments overall handling of funding for GLAS and related schemes.

PS: Its good to see that even among government TDs, the realization that its the Dept and their own government ministers who are primarily responsible for the current mess with regards to these issues.

The EU has threatened the Government with fines over it's lack of protection of the Raised Bog SAC's. Nothing has changed and the Raised Bog SAC's are being destroyed at an ever increasing rate. I would not hold my breath......

Connemara Farmer

Coverage of Fridays protest in tomorrows Farming Independent, as well as other details on the issue I'm sure. Preview of the front page available of Twitter and Facebook.

Connemara Farmer

http://connachttribune.ie/hill-deal-could-be-closer-to-solution-555/

www.farmersjournal.ie/minister-and-department-reviewing-hill-farmers-submission-170820/

patrickn

I just heard Enda Kenny on local radio this morning lauding the fact that Minister Coveney has after very tense negotiations with the EU Commission had the rules pertaining to commonage changed. The only negotiations that was required on this measure was with himself and his staff. The Commission queried the collective agreement and basically asked why is it included.

It is a strange situation that the EU commission is more concerned for the welfare of farmers on marginal lands than our own Dept. and farming groups. The same happened with S.F.P. review when Ciolos stood strong for a minimum value of entitlement which the Minister and many in the I.F.A. would love to see greatly reduced.

rangler1

patrickn wrote: »

I just heard Enda Kenny on local radio this morning lauding the fact that Minister Coveney has after very tense negotiations with the EU Commission had the rules pertaining to commonage changed. The only negotiations that was required on this measure was with himself and his staff. The Commission queried the collective agreement and basically asked why is it included.

It is a strange situation that the EU commission is more concerned for the welfare of farmers on marginal lands than our own Dept. and farming groups. The same happened with S.F.P. review when Ciolos stood strong for a minimum value of entitlement which the Minister and many in the I.F.A. would love to see greatly reduced.

Should I be delighted that I'm going to take a substantial cut in income, because farmers didn't maximise their payments in the nineties.....YEA RIGHT.
Did you do much lobbying yourself for Pillar 2 money or Co funding for the government....didn't think so, only for the IFA you wouldn't have half the money to fight over, we've the highest level of co funding in Europe.
Eaten bread is soon forgotten.....no one should have to take a cut in income

supersean1999

rangler1 wrote: »

Should I be delighted that I'm going to take a substantial cut in income, because farmers didn't maximise their payments in the nineties.....YEA RIGHT.
Did you do much lobbying yourself for Pillar 2 money or Co funding for the government....didn't think so, only for the IFA you wouldn't have half the money to fight over, we've the highest level of co funding in Europe.
Eaten bread is soon forgotten.....no one should have to take a cut in income

Well should people be getting high payments or low payments based on 14 years ago. And also if the money is around the same or lower now. You say no one should have to take a cut. Does that mean that nobody can get a raise in payments either????

dglhills

rangler1 wrote: »

Should I be delighted that I'm going to take a substantial cut in income, because farmers didn't maximise their payments in the nineties.....YEA RIGHT.
Did you do much lobbying yourself for Pillar 2 money or Co funding for the government....didn't think so, only for the IFA you wouldn't have half the money to fight over, we've the highest level of co funding in Europe.
Eaten bread is soon forgotten.....no one should have to take a cut in income

That there is the most concise answer I've seen on any of the issues pertaining to hill/commonage/marginal land farmers. Fair play to you you hit the nail on the head! It has been a long held opinion of my own that this was all along the lines of playground justice, i.e. its my ball and I'm going home, the historical payments are the only show in town and cannot be changed! Reminds me of upward only rent reviews!
The notion that anybody could loose out on payments is unimaginable to some people, but the truth on the matter is CAP changes and so do its priorities or targeted areas. No one is entitled to a specific level of payments for life and it would be very foolish to build a long term vision of well I'm ok I'll get this fixed payment forever and ever and nothing will ever threaten it!
Everyone is entitled to lobby for their own particular interest and I've watched with great interest the power play that is going on since the beginning of the renegotiation of CAP.
Farmers on marginal/hill land etc have become accustomed to falling incomes as a result to cuts in support and other sectors will feel a little of that pain and ill feeling going into the future.
Our department tried its best to protect the high payments of some farmers at the expense of others. To any right/fair minded person it was truly unbelievable what was being proposed and in the end got through, some of that is starting to unravel now and it looks like its time for the Dept. and its Lobby group to step back up and bat for the higher payments once again.
And I'd be the first to admit if my payments were going down again I'd be annoyed but for once, for the moment any way the look like they'll go up!

rangler1

supersean1999 wrote: »

Well should people be getting high payments or low payments based on 14 years ago. And also if the money is around the same or lower now. You say no one should have to take a cut. Does that mean that nobody can get a raise in payments either????

As I said it was there for everyone to maximise your payments, neither you nor dghill have contradicted that, if you haven't maximised your payment is it fair to come after mine for a top up

Bullocks

rangler1 wrote: »

As I said it was there for everyone to maximise your payments, neither you nor dghill have contradicted that, if you haven't maximised your payment is it fair to come after mine for a top up

But rangler it's not yours and what you were given money for back then isn't what they want to give money for now . So I think it is fair that the pot is divided and given to areas they want to spend on now .

Connemara Farmer

rangler1 wrote: »

Should I be delighted that I'm going to take a substantial cut in income

But simon coveney does obviously, supported by 11 countries, think I'll buy a new car to celebrate

I'm just gonna park that there.

---

Heard nothing substantial yet myself, busy letting life get in the way today!

Interesting to see the Dept have admitted they actually have done no work on commonage undergrazing and have no evidence to support that particular claim.

Didn't stop them claiming it all the same.