Index Home Join IPCC

IPCC submission of Wildlife (Amendment) Bill 1999

For immediate release - 10 July 2000

The Irish Peatland Conservation Council, Birdwatch Ireland, An Taisce, Irish Wildlife Trust and Coastwactch Ireland today made a joint submission to the Minister for Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht and the Islands Ms Sile de Valera on changes they would like to see made to the Wildlife Amendment Bill 1999. The recommendations if adopted would strengthen the protection that will be offered to Natural Heritage Areas once the Bill comes into law.

The groups welcomed the updating of the law protecting wildlife and habitats in Ireland. However, as initially published the Bill falls considerably short of addressing fully some of the main concerns of the environmental NGO's.

Specifically the groups indicated that they were concerned that:

1. THERE IS NO LEGAL PROTECTION OR OBLIGATION TO RESTORE PROPOSED NHAS . According to the Bill, the time period from notification of the proposal to the actual designation of the site as an NHA will be six months. During this time, the proposed NHA will have no legal protection. In conjunction with this lack of protection, another major problem is that there is no obligation to restore a damaged pNHA.

They suggest that:
- Sites should be fully protected between notification and designation. It should constitute an offense to damage a site during this period.
- The obligations to restore land in an NHA should also apply to land in an NHA that was damaged while the land was subject of a section16 notice procedure.
- Where works to which section 16 (3)(b) relates have been carried out while the site is pNHA the minister should be obliged to consider the restorative possibilities of the site before deciding not to designate.

2. PERMISSION BY DEFAULT TO CARRY OUT WORKS WILL ARISE IF THE APPLICANT DOES NOT RECEIVE A REPLY FROM DUCHAS WITHIN 6 MONTHS.
The NGO's appreciate that landowners should not be held to ransom due to any procedural inadequacies of the system but it would be unfortunate if Duchas themselves provided the means by which their own inefficiency resulted in damage to NHAs.

They suggest that:
- A statutory obligation be placed on the Minister to reply to all notices for works within a specified time period. In difficult or contentious cases, provision for time extensions should be allowed.

3. AN INDEPENDENT AND TRANSPARENT APPEALS SYSTEM SHOULD OPERATE. The informal appeals procedure currently in operation between Duchas and landowners in relation to SAC designation is not acceptable and should not be followed for NHA purposes.

They suggest that:
- The SAC Appeals Board model be utilised as a basis for a system which would allow much greater transparency and openness in the decision -making process. The board should deal with site designations, consents for works and appeals regarding site boundaries.
- Decisions not to designate should be made on scientific grounds only and should be included in the remit of the appeals board.

4. PROVISION SHOULD BE MADE FOR THIRD PARTY PROPOSALS FOR NHA DESIGNATION

5. AN OBLIGATION FOR DUCHAS TO REPLY TO PLANNING AUTHORITY REFERRALS SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE WILDLIFE ACT.

6. THE MINISTER SHOULD HAVE TO APPLY FOR PLANNING PERMISSION FOR DEVELOPMENTS ON LANDS WITHIN HER CONTROL.

7. WHERE PERMISSION TO CARRY OUT WORKS IS BEING GRANTED FOR OVERRIDING REASONS OF PUBLIC INTEREST EVEN THOUGH THEY MAY DESTROY OR SIGNIFICANTLY ALTER THE SITE, AMELIORATIVE MEASURES SHOULD BE ATTACHED TO THE ORDER.

Hedgerows

8. THE EXTENSION PERIOD FOR THE PROTECTION OF HEDGEROWS BY TWO WEEKS IS WELCOME BUT WE BELIEVE THAT THIS PERIOD SHOULD BE FURTHER EXTENDED TO BEGIN ON THE 1ST OF MARCH.

9. THERE SHOULD BE NO BLANKET EXEMPTIONS FOR AGRICULTURE, FORESTRY OR CONSTRUCTION WORKS WITH RELATION TO HEDGEROW REMOVAL DURING THE NESTING SEASON. Agriculture and forestry activities that result in the destruction of any vegetation growing in a ditch or hedgerow still remain exempt under the Bill.

Drainage

10. IT SHOULD BE A REQUIREMENT FOR THE COMMISSIONERS OF PUBLIC WORKS TO CONSULT WITH THE MINISTER PRIOR TO UNDERTAKING ANY MAINTENANCE WORKS TO EXISTING ARTERIAL DRAINAGE SCHEMES, PARTICULARLY WHERE THESE OCCUR IN OR ADJACENT TO NHAS OR PNHAS WHERE THEY ARE LIKELY TO HAVE A NEGATIVE EFFECT.

11. THE MINISTER SHOULD BE PERMITTED TO STOP ARTERIAL DRAINAGE WORKS WHERE THEY ARE DAMAGING AN NHA OR pNHA.

The full text of the submission can be found on IPCC website at http://indigo.ie/~ipcc