Mr. Jason Fitzgerald:

If one has to answer that question, one has to consider the consequences of the designation and the serious concern around it. The main concern is that farmers are not able to make an income from their lands. The other issue is that farmers cannot sell their land; it is completely worthless. Those issues have to be addressed. A viable long-term scheme has to be introduced. Certainty on the value of land and the future of farming in these areas must be reintroduced. If farmers cannot survive in these areas, hen harriers will not either.

In terms of a long-term scheme, realistically one would want a commitment that as long as a designation will remain in place, funding will be put in place to incentivise farmers to provide a habitat and protect the hen harrier to a level that will cover the costs of farming and the losses as a result of the designation.

The issue of adjoining designated lands has arisen when farmers have been turned down for forestry planting because their land adjoins a designated area. The payments for disadvantaged areas should be larger, but we would prefer if the scheme to deal with the hen harrier issue was properly funded and covered all farmers in the area. The funding has decreased in recent years. The payment sought to make good land equal to bad land, but the payments have been too small for many farmers.

Farmers are probably the best people to protect the hen harrier in these areas because they have lived with them for years and understand their needs. I do not think farmers get credit for the knowledge they have of the bird. Many people want to tell them what to do, order them around and impose designations and restrictions on their land which is causing havoc. The hen harrier population prior to the designation was better. The designated areas were selected for a reason.

I understand about 9% of the people who applied were approved for the scheme. It was impossible for many people to be approved for the scheme. Many people were involved in REPS. Others were renting land and there was a requirement that land was rented for five years previous to the designation. Land had to be purchased three years prior to the designation. People on commonage were not allowed to take part in the scheme. The scheme was designed to be very difficult to get into, but it should have encouraged as many people as possible to participate.

The end goal is to protect the hen harrier. It is very important that farmers are encouraged to do that and are not out of pocket as a result. Most farmers love to farm their land and to protect the nature around them. They have been squeezed into a situation whereby they have to ask to plant or sell their land or realise its value. It is devastating communities. Some farmers in these areas are farming the most challenging arable land in the country. If their only alternative is to plant their land, they will want to do that. A long-term scheme has to be put in place to make farming as attractive and viable as forestry so they are not out of pocket.

The GLAS scheme was mentioned. The biggest problem with the scheme is that it is a five year scheme. A farmer who has no designation could be farming some of the best land in the country, and could be entitled to a maximum GLAS payment of €5,000. With a free and clear deed, he or she can sell his or her land when he or she wishes; he or she simply has to comply with the restrictions of the GLAS.

Our situation is completely different. In 2007 farmers were offered a scheme and were to be incentivised to protect the hen harrier. Land was redesignated on the back of that agreement in EU law. It was wrong to pull money from the scheme. It was not like REPS or similar schemes because they do not affect land values. Farmers were dependent on this scheme to underpin the value of their land and their future on the land.

Many farmers are suffering from severe mental stress and depression as a result of this designation. Farmers do not know where to go and have been offered no support. This has gone on for four years and they are at their wits' end. They are abandoning the land and, in many cases, have given up hope. There is nobody to whom these people can turn.