IFA Submission on the Cessation of Turf-Cutting

IFA Presentation to the Joint Oireachtas Committee

on Environment, Culture and the Gaeltacht

Flooding of the Shannon Callows

Tuesday 11 February 2013

Chairman, Members of the Oireachtas, Ladies and Gentleman,

My name is Michael Silke and I am Chairman of the IFA’s Flood Project Team. I am accompanied today by Joe Parlon, Chairman Offaly IFA, Andrew McHugh, Chairman Longford IFA andGerry Gunning, Executive Secretary of the IFA Rural Development Committee.

The flooding that occurs on the River Shannon is happening more often than in the past but in particular the summer floods are of serious concern to farmers in the area.

In June 2012 the summer flooding effectively wiped out thousands of hectares of grassland which farmers had planned to conserve for the current winter period.

As a result there are no major fodder problems in the area and farmers have to incur high costs in order to feed their animals this winter.

Politicians are putting a lot of faith into the CFRAMS proposal to deal with the on-going problems on the Shannon.

However early indications would suggest that farmers are losing confidence in this process as it was envisaged that there would be a lead agency namely the OPW who would dictate as to what works or other efforts would be put in place to alleviate flooding.

While all the agencies have a role such as OPW, the ESB, Waterways Ireland, National Parks & Wildlife nevertheless there must be political responsibility taken here by Minister Hayes.

It is unacceptable that agencies can have a veto when proposals are made for the alleviation of flooding and actions are required. No one agency should have such a veto particularly when it comes to protecting the public good which includes the livelihood of farmers, dwellers in towns and villages along the river.

In the case of Waterways Ireland, whose remit on these waterways is solely for navigation and recreational purposes, they have consistently allowed artificially high levels to be maintained in our lakes, which has contributed massively to serious flooding. However, Waterways Ireland has suggested that they are working within a parameter with the ESB through a so-called ‘gentleman’s agreement’ to maintain the river and the lakes at a certain level. This is totally unacceptable.

The aim should be to reduce the water levels to the lowest level for navigation purposes so that the river is able to take additional water at critical times such as times of excessively heavy rainfall. I ask the question why were Met Office forecasting procedures not used in anticipation of the high rainfall that arose last June.

Farmers want to know why the levels in Lough Ree were tampered with in the 1970s without consultation and have risen by 0.61m. They were given statutory affect in 1979. Who was this facilitating? Was this to facilitate a wider navigation course all over Lough Ree? Members of this Committee need to address this issue.

Essential maintenance work has not taken place despite the fact that various reports over many decades indicated that remedial works in key areas along the river Shannon would have a massive beneficial effect for farmers, the wider community and also in the protection of our globally threatened wildlife.

The consequences of this failure to maintain the Shannon River system since our State’s foundation in its previous condition has also had a serious impact on the tributaries along the River Shannon particularly the River Suck.

In the case of the ESB, it is clear that the holding back of water at crucial times has led to a situation where it has contributed massively to serious summer flooding. There is no doubt that water levels in Lough Allen and Lough Ree were maintained at an artificially high level.

The current system, which is underpinned by protocols dating back to the early 1970s, disregards landowners’ interests. It is outdated and needs to be overhauled urgently to address the concerns of farmers whose land is submerged in water frequently.

Minister Hayes, who has responsibility for OPW, must take a lead here and insist on implementing a strategy. This must include an early warning system for extreme weather patterns and allow water to move on when heavy rainfall occurs. We also need to see essential maintenance work carried out. All of these measures have to be given legislative effect.

Finally the promise of a lead agency must be delivered upon. The current situation whereby over half a dozen agencies have a say in water levels, with some having a veto on whether remedial works go ahead, is untenable and must be changed. The failures of the past must not be allowed continue and it is up to the Government to address this issue once and for all.