Brian Ó Domhnaill (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I thank the representatives from Teagasc for coming before the committee. The background to this comes from the National Parks and Wildlife Service which has drawn up the plans. I have a number of concerns about what is being done, particularly with regard to the total lack of consultation with the people who farm these lands. No consultation was done with the registered farmers in my constituency and other parts of west Donegal. The manner in which the National Parks and Wildlife Service has dealt with farmers and landowners in recent years is quite disgraceful, particularly the manner in which special areas of conservation and special protection areas have been designated and with regard to the co-operation required on commonage lands.

The commonage framework plans were working quite effectively and farmers were co-operating, albeit they were restricted with regard to grazing. To come forward with a plan without any consultation shows nothing has been learned from the mistakes of the past. We need to go back to the drawing board because what is expected of farmers is wholly unfair. Provision is made for farmers who are away and not farming, but farmers may not be on good terms and may not get on with each other. This is a practical difficulty which, from reading the documentation, has not been considered. A farm planner, REPS planner or agricultural consultant is to carry out a plan for all farmers on the land which might work on paper but will not work in reality. Beside where I live in Donegal are five or six commonages where the farmers will be the first to say it will not work.

There are 7,000 commonages in the country and there is a need to manage them responsibly. The farmers would be the first to say so. We need to return to the drawing board because the proposal is impractical.

The proposal of a specific type of stock for commonages is a major concern. Dexter cattle were mentioned but there are not many of them knocking around. A commonage is a wide definition. I agree with Deputy Ó Cuív that some commonage land is quite arable agricultural land but there is lesser commonage land which provides lesser quality grazing. Many commonages in the State have a mixture of Suffolk Texel cross ewes grazing successfully and rearing two lambs each. For other commonages only black faced mountain sheep are suitable and they might raise only one lamb each. Therefore, a one-size-fits-all approach does not work for commonages. The proposal would be unfair to farmers who have traditionally farmed their lands using a Suffolk Texel cross or pure breeds on commonage lands. Now they are being asked to go back to the drawing board after having invested massively in stock. They are being told that they must use the black face mountain ewe or something like it, but the measure will drive people off the land.

I appreciate that the recommendation came from the National Parks and Wildlife Service. Luckily it was not mentioned in letters that were due to be issued to farmers before Christmas because that would have been disastrous. We need to go back to the drawing board and sit down with the farmers, farm organisations and the people who use commonages and park the proposal for the moment. In practical terms it would create anarchy on commonages. I do not mean to be critical. Instead I am trying to be helpful and practical. We need to park the proposal.