Andrew Doyle (Wicklow, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Senator. The main issue is that we have a collective responsibility approach rather than a co-operative one, which is a big bone of contention. The Senator also mentioned four things that we need to do such as learn from others and take our time bringing farmers on board. I forget the other two suggestions.

The difference between a minimum and maximum must be examined. The tolerance level, going by the two slides shown, for under and over-grazing is quite significant. It does not have to be a very narrow prescriptive level. By doing so, one allows a certain level so that where a large number of people are involved in a commonage and some do not want to participate in the scheme, one does not have to force others to up the level or, on the other hand, one does not have force people to reduce their existing numbers because the overall stocking rate is between the minimum and maximum margins.

Another point, which is not relevant in one sense but is overall, is that the proposal does not apply to national parklands because it only covers defined commonages. However, the nature of the land that forms Natura sites is such that a significant percentage - I would say it is in excess of 60% - of national parklands and, to a lesser extent, Coillte lands is Natura sites. In my opinion, this relates to the type of land as opposed to whether it is commonage or State owned, so the same rules should apply. I say this because with regard to vegetation management, the management of the deer population, which is particularly relevant to where I am from, and stocking rates are intertwined. Unless we have a general discussion on the development of a framework plan we will have missed the boat. While we can do it with commonages, if we leave the significant amount of lands that are in the ownership of the State outside of the control measures, to me that would be a futile exercise. I call on the delegation to respond.