Mayo councillors concerned over agricultural inspections' threat to farmers

Local Mayo councillors have raised concern over agricultural inspections and their threat to farmers at a strategic policy committee meeting for the environment, climate change, and agriculture yesterday.

Two assistant scientists from the Environmental Protection Agency’s National Agricultural Inspections Programme, Liam Rabbitte and Leo Brogan, presented to the meeting.

The pair’s presentation focused on rivers and the effect agriculture has on polluting them, an appropriate follow on from the meeting's other presentation by LAWPRO.

The scientists explained the process of these inspections, and said they are very fair and are ‘not trying to catch anyone out’.

Farmers receive a five to ten day notice ahead of their inspection, and are given a period to fix/alternate issues and findings from the original inspection before being re-inspected about six months later.

In very rare circumstances, inspectors may have to fill up a cross-compliance report, in which they would ‘recommend the farmer in question be penalised under the ‘good agricultural practice regulations’. 

Having only used this penalisation regime once so far, Mr Brogan said: “It’s not something that we would use all that often, we do use it on occasion, but it's kind of the last resort, so our main priority is engaging with the farmers.”

Nationally, agriculture is the top pollution risk for waters, and comes in second for the Mayo region, just behind hydrophobic contaminants. 

Speaking at the meeting, Mr Brogan said it is the local authorities 'task’ to maintain and improve water quality.

"From a drinking water perspective, the council have a big part to play in providing clean drinking water, and we have seen recently enough, an incident whereby a water supply was contaminated by slurry spreading,” he added.

Mr Brogan shared the figure that 50 head of cattle has the same pollution potential as a wastewater treatment plant for a population of 10,000 people.

“If you keep that in mind, that's the potential you have if all those nutrients and bacteria were released into the water untreated, that is the scale of impact you’re talking about,” he said.

Mr Rabbitte’s piece of the presentation showed the committee photos of findings they have made in their 26 inspections so far this year.

Most findings of issues involved manure and slurry storage and application, housekeeping, and control of soil water.

Mr Rabbitte said they ‘understand the pressures of farmers’.

“We’re engaging with them and trying to get the issues resolved, because at the end of the day we're trying to protect the waters, and I know farmers are the definition they’re custodians of the land,” he continued.

Councillor Gerry Murray was concerned that sanctions upon farmers who do not meet inspection criteria may include herd reduction.

Calling it a ‘major question for farmers’, the Sinn Féin local election candidate asked: “At some point in time will it come to a stage where the local authority will have to suggest to the farmer herd reduction as a measure to deal with the issues?”

The question was reiterated by the committee’s chairman, Cllr Michael McLoughlin.

Mr Rabbitte said herd reduction may be mentioned, but said they do not have control over the issue.

“I’m not going to tell a farmer he needs to reduce your animals, but one of the things we do is a calculation of the number of the animals they have for the winter versus their tank storage space. 

He added: "If their tanks say that they can hold waste from 40 animals, and they have 120 animals, then you’re going to say ‘you have three times the amount you’re supposed to have’. They’re supposed to have 18 weeks storage, unfortunately with the bad winter we’ve had, you have to have storage for 24, 26, 28 weeks, it's just kind of the nature of the beast.

“But no, I'm not going to tell any farmer to cut his herd, I won't be doing that,” he concluded.

For more information on the National Agricultural Inspections Programme, see Teagasc’s website.