Bord Pleanála overturns decision on farmer’s fence

Anton McNulty

AN Bord PleanΡla have overturned a decision by Mayo County Council and its own inspector to grant planning permission for a 1.9 kilometre fence in the Sheefrey hills.
Michael Wade of Delphi Lodge, Leenane, had applied to erect a 1.1-metre-high agricultural fence with sheep wire along the southern slopes of Glenummera Mountain at Glenummera, Kilgeever, on the Louisburgh to Leenane Road.
His application was refused by Mayo County Council on the grounds the fence would ‘significantly and detrimentally impact on open character of the landscape’ and interfere with a view and prospect deemed worthy of preservation in the Mayo County Development Plan.
Mr Wade appealed the decision to An Bord PleanΡla (ABP) whose inspector Dolores McCague, who had recommended refusal after reviewing the appeal, determining that the ‘it cannot be concluded that the project would not adversely affect the integrity of the European site in view of the site’s conservation objectives’.

Scenic area
Mr Wade had proposed to fence an area of 350 hectares of land immediately to the rear of Doolough House up the mountain slope for a distance of approximately 580m. The proposed fence is within the Mweelrea/Sheefrey/Erriff Complex SAC and environmental reports had to be submitted as part of the planning process.
In his appeal submitted by David Lally, Chartered Engineer, he stated he always put the environment first when farming. However, he said, he was being prevented from carrying out farming, as without fencing his animals would wander on to the road and surrounding lands.
Mr Lally stated that his client feels that in the interest of the SAC, he should be allowed to fence this area, as at present it is ‘severely overgrazed’ because there is no fence between it and a large area of commonage.
He stated that the type of fencing proposed is the lowest-impact kind available, weathering down quickly to become unobtrusive. It cannot restrict views in anyway, he stated.
In her report, Ms McCague said that the site is located in a very scenic area and she said she would have concerns that the length of fence along the public road would restrict the view and interfere with the nature of the view.
With regards to land management, she said that if a more ‘convincing argument was made regarding land management’ she would consider that the adverse visual impact should be offset against those benefits. However, she felt a convincing argument had not been made and for those reasons she supported the Council’s refusal.
Despite McCague’s report, the board of ABP accepted a report from the Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht, which stated that the ‘area in question has been heavily grazed arising from the uncontrolled trespass of sheep at this location’, and that ‘fencing of this area would allow appropriate grazing management’.
The department also found that the fence would not be detrimental to the character of the landscape, predicting that the visual impact would be minimal.
Planning permission for the fence was granted subject to two conditions.