Seán Kyne (Galway West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the officials from the NPWS and the Department. I am not a member of the committee but I have a significant interest in this area as I come from Connemara in west Galway. I was a REPS planner in my previous life, mainly in east Galway and latterly in Connemara and various other places. I prepared many REPS plans, so I have some experience in this area.

I agree with Senator Ó Domhnaill regarding the issue that came to the fore before Christmas. There was concern among farmers regarding what was happening and information appearing in the Irish Farmers' Journal that culminated in the production of the minimum and maximum figures. There is general agreement that collective responsibility would be hugely problematic, not for all commonages but certainly for some of them. A commonage may contain only four guys who get on well and will sit down around a table, thrash something out and get agreement. However, there can be significant numbers of people in commonages and collective responsibility would be impossible to work out. Commonages are some of the most complex areas one could find. Dr. Bleasdale came up with a figure of 410,000 hectares for a reference area, while the Department has a figure of 330,000 hectares, so there is a difference of 80,000 hectares. I do not know if there are issues with dormancy, but there is a discrepancy in the figures.

Lead-in times were mentioned. Irrespective of what is coming, is it safe to say that there will be no impact on payments in 2013 and that nothing will be decided? That is of concern. I agree with some speakers on the whole commonage approach. I have used this simple example before. There are ten shareholders on a commonage, three of whom are dormant, four inactive and three active, and the total number of sheep allowed on the commonage is 300. If the three farmers each have 100 sheep, using the whole-commonage approach, the commonage is being grazed and looked after. Based on what the Commission should be looking at, it would say that the commonage is being managed correctly by the shareholders. The three active farmers would be concerned that suddenly the number of sheep would be divided by ten and they would get 30 sheep instead of 100. Some of the inactive farmers have no interest in going back on the hills and the question arises as to what one does with the dormant shares. Some of the inactive farmers are elderly and are not in a position to be walking hills due to conditions such as arthritis or high blood pressure. There is a range of factors, because there are more farmers over 85 than there are under 35. These issues are hugely complex. I believe in the whole-commonage approach. If the commonage is being managed correctly, the question of who is doing what should be irrelevant. I would like to see the delegation convince the Commission of this. Dr. Bleasdale used the example of south Connemara, which he said was in GAEC, while the situation is not as good in north Connemara. If south Connemara is doing things correctly, why delve into it and try to solve something that is not a problem when one could end up causing a problem by doing so? If it is in GAEC then, obviously, somebody is doing something right. The farmers who are not grazing are contributing to GAEC, as are those who are grazing. Overall, the commonage is in GAEC so all the individual farmers are in GAEC.

In respect of dormancy, I would imagine there are legal implications in terms of somebody having shares somewhere on a folio. It might be in their grandfather's name, or the owner might be long gone or might not know it exists. What are the legal implications where those people have not farmed for years or decades or since the LPIS system came into operation? I support the view that the slack be taken up by active farmers.

Traditional stock is of concern. I am not sure if the suggestions came from the delegation, but the newspapers mentioned animals such as Kerry cows and Dexter cattle, which are not available in huge numbers and would in large part not be of interest to many farmers.

If one attends Maam Cross mart in Connemara in my constituency, one will discover farmers who own traditional British breeds and continental breeds sired by continental bulls. They would not really be in favour of moving to the Dexter or Kerry breeds. They would be fine with moving to the Angus breed because it is a traditional one in certain parts.

Are farmers who graze cattle on commonages but who do not graze sheep there regarded as being active or inactive? Map farming on commonages has been a concern. I have raised this matter on previous occasions and I do not condone the type of behaviour involved. Deputy Barry referred to fencing. Even if what he suggests were possible, there would be implications in the context of planning permission and problems with regard to unenclosed areas, high scenic amenity areas and commonages.

A delegation from the Connemara and Mayo branches of the IFA met the Minister in respect of this matter. He indicated that he is of the view that the possibility of establishing liaison groups in respect of commonages should be considered. In general, the Connemara branch of the IFA was supportive of this suggestion. I would also concur with it, in instances where it would be possible to establish such groups. Under such a process, representatives from the national parks, farmers and officials from the Department could begin with the least problematic commonages and draw up a package. Liaison groups of this sort could consider the minimum and maximum stocking rates, etc. Concerns exist with regard to the number of elderly farmers operating on commonages. Those individuals may have been productive prior to the introduction of destocking. However, as Deputy Ó Cuív stated, their herds were gradually destocked. They might have been assisted by their sons or other relatives, but the latter might have been forced to emigrate and the farmers in question were left on their own. If we were to consider the matter on the basis of an individual-share approach, it could be hugely problematic for these people even to reach the minimum figure.

What are our guests' views on liaison groups? The Minister appeared to indicate that he was agreeable to their establishment. The farm representatives are supportive of the suggestion in this regard. The issues involved are massively complex. For example, despite a tendency to assume that huge damage was done to commonages, 70% of them were actually undamaged when the relevant research was carried out. What is the position now with regard to overgrazing? The slides we were shown indicate the huge improvement that has taken place. I would be concerned if a sudden decision were made in the context of farmers who are not active losing payments. I appreciate that the suggestion in this regard may have emanated from the Commission. I am of the view that we should do everything to promote a whole-of-commonage approach to the Commission.