Mr. David Flynn:

It is important to be clear the EPA and Teagasc are both very much aware of the results coming out of each set of monitoring programmes. The Teagasc ACP is based on the six catchments, which are relatively small. The EPA monitoring programme is based on the national picture, so it is more complete but not as detailed. That is where the ACP has its benefit as it is very detailed, though it is focused on a smaller subset. I agree with Mr. Callanan that if one looks at the results coming from both - though I have not done a full assessment - they are identifying the same issues. Both show that in many cases the level of nutrients in our water is too high and that is the bottom line.