Sonairte: The National Ecology Centre
Submission to the Dept of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food on the 2020 strategy
Contact:
Kathy Marsh
Sonairte: The National Ecology Centre
Laytown, Co Meath
041 982 7572
info@sonairte.ie
www.sonairte.ie
When discussing the future of farming in Ireland it is essential to recognise that any
demands for subsidised fuel or other inputs in the future is unrealistic. With
international competition for increasingly scarce resources a small island offshore
from the European mainland cannot make its agricultural system dependent upon
competing with economies of the potential size of China, the USA or Brazil. Instead
we need to recognise the resources we have and build upon the strength of those.
Ireland’s chief resource, in terms of agriculture, is the temperate climate that allows
extensive grazing during much of the year and the rapid growth of trees. And this
leads to an international image of a green island. We also have the benefit of wind and
water which, in the long term, can provide accessible energy and we have the
inestimable value of our image as a green island.
The Agri-Environment must be considered as a public good. The term green economy
is frequently bandied about – agriculture provides an economy that is both literally
and metaphorically green.
At a time when climate change is at the top of the political and physical agenda the
agri–environment provides carbon sinks, carbon sequestration, renewable energy and
on farm fuel production. It also gives us the problem of livestock, methane and carbon
dioxide release, but can also stabilise the emission of those gases. We frequently see
the use of unrealistic models of greenhouse gas release which have been generated in
countries with different agricultural systems. Support for low tillage agriculture is
also support for carbon sequestration.
Some sectors within Irish agriculture have opposed the implementation of the draft
Soil Framework Directive because of a perceived overlap with regulations already in
place. We understand their concerns – farmers are frequently overwhelmed by
duplicated paperwork - but strongly believe that there is a need for the directive.
Humanity is as dependent upon the soil beneath our feet as upon air and water and
awareness of the need to care for it needs to be extended beyond the farming
community. We do, however, recognise the need to avoid duplication and feel that the
Department of Agriculture and other state agencies should work more closely together
to produce single recording and inspections systems that can be used to meet all
regulatory frameworks. This would reduce the cost of compliance to both the farmer
and government.
Being an offshore island has implications both for selling to markets around the world
and for buying from markets around the world. Unfortunately those markets seem to
have developed in recent years in a way that is unsustainable over the long term with
production becoming more intensive and dependent upon imported inputs in order to
meet ever expanding international demand for cheap food. In fact recent research is
beginning to show that extensive systems yield food with higher nutritional value but
this is not being reflected in marketing either at home or abroad, nor is it being
reflected in much advice coming from Teagasc and other advisors or by export
advisory services. A further problem is that most of the population by most of their
food through the supermarkets where the emphasis is on the maximum margin at
point of sale regardless of the impact on the producer or on the environment of the
relentless forcing down of prices. A largely undeducated public continues to demand
food that is low in price but not of optimum quality. Unfortunately there is little
opportunity for the majority of farmers to market their produce directly – the
population is on the east coast and most food is not produced there. Even where food
is marketed directly through farmers markets or direct sales there is a perception that
such food is expensive, despite the fact that most purchasers never actually go to a
farmers market to find out what the prices are. The same purchasers will pay premium
prices for so called functional foods whose benefits are no higher, or may even be
less, than local fresh meat and poultry, fruit and vegetables, or milk from extensive
production. It is important that the public be educated through advertising
programmes and school education about the value of fresh local food.
We also feel that it is important to stress the need for import substitution. In Ireland
there is a perceived shortage of high end meat and poultry products and imports take
this market share. Public education to use cheaper cuts could lead to optimised
carcase value. Culinary education is an important part of the remit of Bord Bia but the
Department of Education needs to be engaged as well. Recent campaigns to teach
children how vegetables grow should be extended across the entire agricultural sector.
It is perhaps significant that high end restaurants have no difficulty marketing cheap
cuts to their customers – the resistance comes further down the market. We will return
to import substitution in the contexts of horticulture and of organic farming but would
like to re-emphasise the sustainability and lower real costs of traditional food
production systems when artificial subsidies in terms of international productiona and
export subsidies, obvious and concealed, are taken into account. Sectoral production
is not sustainable if it is based on increasing imported inputs
In this context there is a need for voluntary labelling to show country of origin – and
even county of origin – on the front of packaging. Meats in such a scheme must be of
Irish origin, not just Irish processed. Irish sourcing of feed should be indicated on
packaging too.
As part of the Green Ireland image there is enormous potential marketing value in a
“GM free feed” labelling. As we know, the European consumer does not want GM
ingredients directly in their food and, where they are aware that livestock feed is
genetically modified and they have the option to avoid it, they make that choice as
well. A significant problem is the unwillingness of feed importers to bring in GM free
soya because of the small price difference – and it is extremely small, less than 1c/kg
finished carcasse weight. If Ireland were able to market all meat and poultry as GM
free there would be an immediate impact both on import substitution and on export
values. Indeed a GM free Ireland would be a very valuable marketing tool both for
food exports and for tourism.
This leads to the value of the landscape and of agri-tourism. There is a need for the
valuing both of agriculture’s contribution to biodiversity and of biodiversity’s
contribution to agriculture. A balanced ecology has enormous benefits to the farmer in
terms of pest and disease control and mediates the impact of farm inputs on soil and
water quality. This cannot be achieved without the work of the farmer. Unfortunately
the new Agri-Environment scheme has many shortfalls and clearly demonstrates the
absence of public consultation in its design – it must be hoped that over the next few
days steps will be taken to remedy some of the worst of the problems. The farmer
needs proper support as custodian of the landscape. There is inadequate valuing of
marginal lands as a public envirnomental good, and insufficient encouragement for
the integration of native woodland and biodivers hedgerow planting and maintenance
into farm plans. Nor is there any reward for allowing access to farmland.
Agritourism is a very valuable sector of the rural economy in many countries.
Unfortunately in Ireland the system seems to be prescripotive rather than encouraging
and the decline of the bed and breakfast sector’s contribution has been hastened by
restrictive regulations which limit what on farm catering and activities can be
provided and by subsidies to unnecessary hotel bedroom provision, leading to
buildings which actually damage the landscape and the overall tourism potential of
some areas. There are good models for agritourism in countries as diverse as Italy and
the Netherlands and the examples they provide should be followed. The extension of
right to roam provision and of footpath networks is critical to the economic
development of rural tourism in modern Ireland – they higher spending tourist is as
likely to be travelling by bicycle or on foot nowadays as by car. The absence of rural
public transport is also a major hindrance to the development of the sector.
Agriculture needs to work closely with leader plus and community partnerships to
develope ecotourism
Bioenergy is an important new potential income source for the farmer but it too needs
to be examined in terms of the landscape and its impact on tourisms and of
biodiversity. Monocropping with alien species is a danger to both. There is a need to
develop alternative fuel sources that are suitable to Irish ecological systems and that
are based on very low inputs
Horticulture is perhaps the biggest potential sector for import substitution. We have
become used to cheap imports first from the Netherlands and more recently from
Spain. The systems in use in these countries is not sustainable – in the Netherlands
groundwater has become seriously contaminated and in southern Spain it is becoming
exhausted. It is time to look at redeveloping Irish horticulture. To see shops full of
imported soft fruit when it is actually in season in Ireland demonstrates a lack of
commitment to research and development. We have seen strawberry producers
successfully fight back against Spanish imports for much of the year and there is the
same potential for all soft fruits and for many other crops. In organics the situation is
even more extreme – 70% of horticultural products are imported and much of this
could be Irish produced. The main barrier seems to be that organic farming, being a
modern development, is largely confined to lower priced marginal land unsuitable for
horticulture. Where modernising farmers have decided to develope organic systems
on good land the results have been outstandingly profitable. There is also a need for
more research on low tillage and low input systems in the sector to reduce producer
costs, especially fertiliser and fuel. Horticulture has a potential for high rural
employment. Producers need support to help them reduce the pressure from retail
sector to provide loss leaders and the promotion of local and Irish. The potential of
farmers markets if price is right and if sited in right places – they should not be seen
as an expensive place to shop – has not yet been fully developend – there is no reason
why buying directly from the producer should cost more than buying same product
from same producer via the supermarket
Aquaculture – need for improved assessment of environmental impacts, sourcing of
feeds to minimise environmental impact. The high potential of secondary processing
has not been developed – there is an economic need to export processed not bulk
products.
In the context of aquaculture we would wish to draw attention to the decline in wild
salmon stocks. Various reasons have been suggested for this decline, one being the
transmission of disease between wild and caged stocks. While we applaud the
decision to cease salmon netting we would like to point out the damage done to
spawning grounds and to waterways in general by inappropriate afforestation and the
accompanying destabiliation, draining and degradation of peat bogs with all its
accompanying implications for carbon release.
Forestry – well planted native broadleaved forests are essential to the maintenance of
biodiversity with the accompanying implications for public good. Not only do they
have significant benefits in terms of carbon sequestration but they provide filters for
water supplies and long term significant income on harvest. Appropriate species can
also help to stabilise mountain peat bogs, maintaining captured carbon banks. It is
unfortunate no use was made of available European 80% funding for the planting of
native woodlands. In terms of landscape and biodiversity maintenance the inclusion
of hedgerows as part of forestry plantings would be beneficial
The Organic Sector – the food and agriculture organisation now recognises the
potential of modern organic systems to produce equal amounts of food per hectare
when compared to conventional agricultural systems. Furthermore organic systems do
this using lower levels of inputs. Recent research has shown that organic extensive
grazing sequestrates 25% more carbon than equivalent conventional systems. This
needs to be given financial recognition when national carbon budgets are being
determined. The high level of biodiversity both at soil and landscape levels in organic
systems should be recognised.