Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees
Wednesday, 10 July 2024
Joint Oireachtas Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine
Compliance with the Nitrates Directive and Implications for Ireland: Discussion (Resumed)
5:30 pm
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I remind members to turn off their mobile phones. Deputy Kerrane might confirm for the secretariat that she is on the Leinster House campus.
Claire Kerrane (Roscommon-Galway, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Yes, I am on the campus.
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank the Deputy. I bring to the witnesses' attention that witnesses giving evidence from within the parliamentary precincts are protected by absolute privilege in respect of the evidence they give to the committee. This means that a witness has a full defence against any defamation action for anything said at a committee meeting. However, witnesses are expected not to abuse this privilege and may be directed to cease giving evidence on an issue at the Chair's direction. Witnesses should follow the direction of the Chair in this regard. They are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that, as is reasonable, no adverse commentary should be made against an identifiable third person or entity. Witnesses giving evidence from a location outside the parliamentary precincts are asked to note they may not benefit from the same level of immunity from legal proceedings as does a witness giving evidence from within the parliamentary precincts and may consider it appropriate to take legal advice on this matter. Privilege against defamation does not apply to publication by witnesses outside the proceedings held by the committee of any matters arising from the proceedings.
Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. Parliamentary privilege is considered to apply to the utterances of Members participating online in committee meetings from within the parliamentary precincts. Members may not participate online in a public meeting from outside the parliamentary precincts, and any attempt to do so will result in the member having his or her online access removed.
The committee will hear from the following officials from the Environmental Protection Agency: Dr. Eimear Cotter, director of the office of evidence and assessment, Dr. Jenny Deakin, senior scientist in the office of evidence and assessment, Ms Mary Gurrie, programme manager in the office of evidence and assessment, and Mr. Patrick Byrne, programme manager in the office of environmental enforcement. They are welcome to the meeting. I invite Dr. Cotter to deliver her opening statement.
Dr. Eimear Cotter:
I thank the Chairman and committee for inviting the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, to discuss the topic of compliance with the nitrates directive and its implications for Ireland. I am joined by EPA senior management colleagues Ms Mary Gurrie and Dr. Jenny Deakin, who deal with water quality monitoring and assessment, and Mr. Patrick Byrne, who leads the national agricultural inspection programme in the EPA's office of environmental enforcement.
Clean water is essential for our health and well-being, our economy and the environment. Water quality in Ireland is not as good as it should be and we are not on track to meet our legally binding water quality objectives by 2027. While all sectors have a role to play, agriculture is the primary source of nitrate losses to water and contributes a significant proportion of phosphate losses, in addition to waste water.
The EPA published the water quality indicators for 2023 in June 2024. These indicators provide an update on water quality in advance of the full three-yearly assessment, which will be published in 2025. Overall, water quality indicators for 2023 show no significant change in water quality compared to 2022 and no sign of an overall improvement. The key findings are that there has been no significant change in the biological quality of rivers or lakes. While improvements are happening in some areas, these are being offset by declines elsewhere. Biological quality will not improve until nutrient levels reduce in water bodies where they are too high. Average nitrate levels are largely unchanged since 2022 and remain too high in the east, south east and south. In 2023, nitrate levels exceeded the level needed to support good water quality in 42% of rivers, 20% of groundwaters and 17% of estuarine and coastal waters. Average phosphorus levels were also largely unchanged between 2022 and 2023 and remain too high in 27% of rivers and 35% of lakes.
In order to reduce nutrient losses from agriculture, measures and action must be targeted. The EPA has invested in and developed a range of tools and resources to support farmers and their advisers in identifying what type of measure needs to be implemented, and where, to deliver improvements in water quality. These include the EPA’s targeting agricultural measures map and pollution impact potential maps, both of which are publicly available. Reducing nitrogen losses to water requires a reduction in the amount of nitrogen leaching through freely draining soils. This requires a reduction in the nitrogen surplus through measures such as improving the nitrogen use efficiency, better nutrient management planning and reducing the overall nitrogen load. The lag time between nitrogen reduction measures and reduced nitrogen concentrations in water bodies can vary depending on the soil type and weather. However, if nitrogen reduction measures are implemented at scale and in the critical source areas where most leaching occurs, we would expect to see signs of improvements in nitrogen levels within six months to a year at a national level.
Specifically related to phosphorous, it is critical that the flow pathway between the land and the water body is broken. This includes, for example, preventing soiled water or effluent running into a drain or watercourse, or by maintaining a buffer zone to intercept flow and nutrients at the area where the run off occurs. Breaking the pathway, if implemented at scale by all farmers, should reduce phosphate levels and deliver improvements in water quality relatively quickly, particularly in our freshwater rivers and lakes.
With regard to compliance and enforcement, in 2022 the EPA was assigned an expanded role to oversee local authority agricultural inspections under the fifth nitrates action programme. The EPA, in consultation with local authorities and other relevant bodies, has developed a national agricultural inspection programme for the period 2023 to 2025. The aim of the national agricultural inspection programme is to improve water quality by improving the level of compliance with the good agricultural practice, GAP, regulations. This includes achieving consistency in dealing with non-compliances such as use of enforcement actions and cross reporting to the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine. Based on data from the national agricultural inspection programme for 2022 and 2023, non-compliances with the GAP regulations are being detected on more than 30% of farms inspected. It is clear that compliance levels need to improve significantly to protect water quality and prevent pollution from agricultural sources.
In summary, all farmers, and not just those in derogation, have a role to play in reducing nutrient losses to water. The science and knowledge are available to know what the problems with water quality are, where they are and how to solve them. While water quality is recognised as a high priority for the agricultural sector, and there is much action under way, we need to see a significant increase in the scale and pace of implementation of measures to reduce nutrient losses. This should include full compliance with the GAP regulations and significant improvements in nitrogen use efficiency to reduce the nitrogen surplus. We may also need to see an overall reduction in load in some catchments where nitrate levels are substantially in excess of the levels needed to support good water quality. The EPA will continue to work constructively and collaboratively with relevant Government Departments and agencies to provide the evidence base to inform policy and action to improve water quality.
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank Dr. Cotter. Before I call Senator Lombard, Dr. Cotter said in regard to the key findings: "There has been no significant change in the biological quality of rivers or lakes. While improvements are happening in some areas, these are being offset by declines elsewhere." What would she attribute the improvements to and where are they happening? What would she attribute the declines to as well?
Dr. Eimear Cotter:
Overall, we are seeing improvements in the biological quality of some areas. Ms Gurrie might highlight where those areas are when I have finished. The enabling conditions in the water quality are getting better. Nutrient levels, perhaps, are improving in those water bodies. There can be a range of issues such as nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment. Similarly, on the declines, biological conditions are declining because of the enabling conditions with nutrients being a major factor in that. Does Ms Gurrie want to talk through where the key areas are?
Ms Mary Gurrie:
The monitoring is done over a three-year cycle and each catchment is monitored over that. For the catchments that were monitored in 2022 and 2023, we saw net improvements in the Liffey, Slaney, Moy and Erne river catchments. We saw net declines in the Nore, Suir, Barrow, Shannon, Lee, Laune, Feale and Lough Swilly river catchments.
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Is there a pilot programme in the areas where the improvements are? What specific actions do the witnesses think resulted in the improvements? I am more interested in the improvements than the opposite.
Dr. Eimear Cotter:
We are looking at what is happening in water. We are looking at, for example, nutrient levels, nitrogen and phosphorus. Linking what is happening in the water environment back to what is happening at farm level is an area where there is a gap. We do not know how the practices and the changes the farmers are making on the land relate to the changes that we are seeing in water quality. That is a gap that we have identified and we would like to see Teagasc lead out on improving our knowledge in this space.
We know the standards that need to be achieved in terms of water quality. We know the tonnage reduction of nitrogen that needs to be achieved in terms of bringing nitrogen out of the system. What does that mean in terms of practices on the farm? That is not our area of expertise. That is not where the EPA can add its competence and expertise but certainly, in terms of Teagasc, we would like to be able to link the farm practices to what is needed in the environment.
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
There is a serious gap in the whole system where we see an improvement in water quality but we are not able to ascertain the reason for that improvement.
Tim Lombard (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank the witnesses. It is very important that the EPA is here. I want to acknowledge the opening statement and the information given. I will start with the opening statement which stated that we could expect an improvement in nitrogen levels within six months to a year at a national level. Dr. Cotter might expand on that point and on the research done to make sure we have the data required to see that huge change, potentially in a year, in water quality. What I reference is the report issued by the EPA yesterday. It was a significant report which showed there has been a reduction in fertiliser and nitrogen by 18%. It was a really positive report in terms of where we are with our greenhouse gases. It stated that one of the key reasons we reduced our greenhouse gases was because of the reduction in nitrogen. That was an 18% reduction in nitrogen.
On the other side of that, we are saying that potentially we could see within a year the knock-on implications of that in the quality of water. Would Dr. Cotter be confident, in terms of the 2023 report, that we will see an 18% reduction in nitrates, or is this a very complicated thing, in that I am not familiar with how long it would take the nitrate level to fall? We have seen it fall in the report published yesterday, but would Dr. Cotter be confident on the back of that there will be a fall in 2023?
Dr. Eimear Cotter:
We will have to see is the direct answer. We did see an 18% reduction in chemical fertiliser use. That has translated into a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, which is really positive.
We know that chemical fertiliser is responsible for a third of the nutrients that are applied to land. There are other sources of nutrients being applied to land. The 18% reduction is a national figure. We do not know where the reductions are happening. This is another gap but the fertiliser register will help in that regard. It has been in place since September of last year. The information will help us to at least see where fertiliser is being sold and build a picture of where those reductions are happening. We hope we will see the results of reduced fertiliser use translated into water quality in the future.
Tim Lombard (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The figure that has been discussed but not verified by the industry is that there has been a 30% reduction in nitrogen, specifically chemical nitrogen, in a 24-month period which is a significant figure. If that figure were to be verified and the EPA correct regarding reductions in six to 12 months, even taking into consideration that it only accounts for one third, that would be represent a significant amount of nitrates being sorted in the context of water quality. Is that fair to say?
Dr. Eimear Cotter:
I will not repeat my answer. It is approximately one third of the nutrients that are applied onto land. It is a national figure. We will need to see where that nitrogen and those chemical fertilisers are being reduced. If it is being reduced on those risky free-draining soils, that is critical for reducing our nitrate levels. If we see it in our data for next year, we will report it, and if we do not, we will report that too.
Tim Lombard (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I want to turn to the other 70% of the nitrogen. If 30% of it is made up of chemical nitrogen, what is the breakdown of the other 70%?
Tim Lombard (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
What is the organic level?
Tim Lombard (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I presume that 60% is from both the animal and what has been spread.
Tim Lombard (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank Dr. Deakin for the clarity on that issue. I ask the witnesses to explain how the EPA targeted mapping works, how the system works and how quickly the data is uploaded onto that system.
Tim Lombard (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I might come back to Ms. Gurrie if I can. On the original question of mapping, how does the system work?
Dr. Jenny Deakin:
The targeting agricultural measures map we have produced that the Senator is referring to shows where nitrogen, phosphorus and ammonium measures need to happen. That is based on our monitoring data around the country that is water body specific. We can tell from that monitoring data how much reduction is needed and where the sources of those nutrients are coming from. We pulled out the agricultural contribution to each of those three nutrients to compile that agricultural measures map. As the committee will know, there are colours on that map. Orange refers to nitrogen, blue is for phosphorus and red is for ammonium. White refers to where either the water quality is satisfactory or the sources of pollution are other than agriculture.
Tim Lombard (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The data then comes six weeks or six months after the testing.
Tim Lombard (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
That information is put up online on the system.
Tim Lombard (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
It is positive that the information is coming within six weeks of the whole thing. There is an opportunity here, however, which the witnesses can take or leave. The EPA might be able to help farmers more regarding the information itself. If we had a scenario where we had a test in a river body that was inappropriate and the farmers knew about it in a week or less, they would be able to react to what their neighbour might be doing. They might be able to empower themselves to get more done on the ground. They could make sure everyone is doing what is appropriate because they are all in this together.
If information is coming back six to eight weeks later, it is questionable whether there would be a response to it. If the farmers knew there was a water quality issue within a short space of time, they might respond and self-police themselves. This is only a suggestion for ensuring farmers get the information at a faster rate so they can empower themselves to make the changes that are appropriate.
Dr. Eimear Cotter:
I take the point but we have decades of data on water quality. We are monitoring 3,000 water bodies throughout the country. This is all designed, set up and established under the water framework directive. As Ms Gurrie said, that information is available within six weeks. We have developed tools and maps to enable agricultural advisers to work with farmers and help them to target where those measures need to be. We are a data science-driven organisation; we always want more data. In this case, however, I urge the committee in finalising its report to focus on the implementation of measures that need to happen to improve water quality. The committee should look at compliance, for example, and nitrogen use efficiency. We are not lacking data on water quality in Ireland.
Tim Lombard (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
My point was that we have the data but if we get that data more quickly to the farm gate that would help the farmer empower himself or herself to make the decisions that are appropriate. The advisers are very helpful and an important part of this tool but there is an opportunity here to empower the farmer directly. For example, if you had a tank collection tomorrow morning, you would get your test within 24 hours of what is in that tank. Something similar could be appropriate here with regard to a water body. If that was put online and farmers were aware of it, there could be a positive opportunity for them to empower themselves to make sure they are doing the right practices.
Dr. Eimear Cotter:
There is a vast amount of information available on the EPA website. In the past six months, Teagasc has been more focused on looking at that data and tailoring it for farmers. We have developed further maps to enable farmers to get at it. I know there is not much accessible information for a farmer but work is being done to improve that. There is a huge amount of information there and the EPA does not believe that is the gap when it comes to improving water quality.
Tim Lombard (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Regarding phosphorus and how we can deal with that issue, according to the EPA maps that have been published, some of the areas are not the most highly stocked. What is the gap between our current phosphorus levels and those we need to reach that have been proposed? What are the measures that we need to be looking at? It is different from the nitrates map in many ways.
Dr. Eimear Cotter:
We do not get into specifying the particular measures because that is not our area of expertise. We can talk generally about what needs to happen at a farm level in terms of reducing phosphorus. We are focused on the environment but we can talk generally on what we see needs to happen.
Tim Lombard (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The EPA's maps would have a different level. Traditionally, it might be said that the south or the east has a nitrate issue. It is a different profile of operation when we look at the phosphorus issue. The majority of them potentially would not be in a derogation area if at all, regarding the maps themselves.
Dr. Jenny Deakin:
The issues with phosphorus are the opposite to the nitrogen issue in the context of where the risky areas are in the landscape. The nitrogen issue is a freely draining soil problem in the south and south east. The phosphorus issues are driven by the poorly draining soils. The mechanism of transport for the nutrient from the farm to the stream is usually overland, with rainfall on hard surfaces, compact surfaces or poorly draining soils. While there are advantages in reducing the source load of phosphorus, it takes a tiny amount of phosphorus to cause a water quality problem relative to the amounts used on the farm. We would call for pathway interception measures, which break the pathway between the source of the phosphorus on the farm and the river. It is about finding the areas on a farm where the water flows when it rains because that water will bring the sediment and phosphorus with it. If you can intercept those with a buffer strip, hedge, pond or some sort of interception feature to hold back the water and let the phosphorus and sediment settle out, that is the way of approaching the phosphorus issue.
Tim Lombard (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The witnesses have concluded that we are probably at a stalemate at present, for lack of better terminology. Water has not decreased or increased and we are where we are with the system itself.
It gives a reduction in nitrogen levels to some degree, which is only 30% as Dr. Deakin stated. Is this about enforcement or increasing the amount of testing being done? Is the EPA happy that its testing regimes are appropriate and that more data is not needed? I know the agency has stated that it has enough data but where are the gaps, if any, in the EPA set up that might help in getting more information and data? From the point of view of the witnesses, what should we be recommending for the EPA? Does it need anything more or is it happy with what is being proposed at the moment regarding the system that is in place?
Dr. Eimear Cotter:
We are happy with our monitoring data. It is comprehensive. We have been doing it for many years and we have a large number of data sets. Our whole monitoring network is put together under the water framework directive and it is looked at by the Commission on a regular basis. It has always been seen to be properly elaborated, so we are completely satisfied with our monitoring.
We were given a new role in 2022 and what needs to happen first of all, is improving compliance under the good agricultural practice, GAP, regulations. We were assigned a new role in 2022 as part of the fifth nitrates action programme to enhance our oversight of local authority agricultural inspections. This is a new area for which we have spent the past two years developing a national agriculture inspections programme. We have a new team in the EPA and we have assigned a certain number of inspections to local authorities, for this year and next year. The number of inspections and the level of follow through on non-compliance had really fallen off. Also, the consistency of the inspections across different local authorities had to be addressed, through this new programme. Mr. Byrne can go into more detail on this, if the committee requires. We are working closely with local authorities on this programme, in terms of improving compliance.
Mr. Patrick Byrne:
Yes, I can elaborate on the agricultural inspections programme. Previously, local authorities undertook inspections under the GAP regulations. The number of inspections had decreased considerably. It was identified that compliance levels were not where we would like them to be. A plan was put in place to increase the resource of inspectors in the local authorities and dedicate them to inspection of farms. As Dr. Cotter pointed out, we have set the target for 2024 at approximately 3,500 farm inspections by local authorities and this will increase to 4,500 in 2025. This is based on a resource that has been allocated by the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage, for additional staff in the local authorities. At the moment we are putting in place training for those new staff members. We are doing this with the more experienced inspectors, who are already in the local authorities, and Department of agriculture inspectors, to try to generate consistency across the local authorities.
Tim Lombard (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
How will they be assigned? Will it be per local authority? Some agricultural activity is more expansive in some areas than others. How will the EPA work out where or when the inspectors will be put in place?
Mr. Patrick Byrne:
That piece of work has already been done on the basis of the number of water bodies at risk in each local authority and the number of farms in the areas. Obviously more staff resources will be allocated to areas with significant agriculture pressures. Those numbers have been assigned, and based on the resources assigned, we have calculated how many inspections should happen in each local authority.
Tim Lombard (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
That would be one for nitrates and phosphorous?
Tim Lombard (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Okay, thank you, Chair.
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Are the inspections picked at random or are they picked on a risk basis?
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The EPA is picking the areas where the water quality is showing a disimprovement?
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
You said there was a 30% non-compliance rate in the inspections that were done. Would the lack of slurry accommodation be the principal reason?
Mr. Patrick Byrne:
When we refer to a figure of approximately 30%, we have got data back from the level of inspections that happened in 2022 and 2023. From a review of that data from local authorities, approximately 30% of the non-compliances are to do with control of side water. Approximately 20% is management of farmyard manure. Discharges with the potential to adversely impact water quality - for example, discharged surface water - accounts for approximately 20%, and slurry collection and storage is approximately 15%.
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Only 15%?
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I would have thought the slurry accommodation would be higher.
Mr. Patrick Byrne:
We can only base it on what has been found in those two years. As I mentioned, we are increasing the training available to the inspectors in the local authorities, supported by established local authority inspectors and others from the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine. Slurry capacity is one of the aspects they would focus on.
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
It is clearly definable, Mr. Byrne. The slurry storage can calculated on the amount of stock, using the computerised maintenance management system, CMMS. You either have it or you do not, really.
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I just thought it would be higher.
Johnny Mythen (Wexford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I think most of the questions I was going to ask have already been asked. In a perfect scenario, what is the level needed for the nitrates directive?
Johnny Mythen (Wexford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
What does that mean, exactly?
Johnny Mythen (Wexford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
In terms of both.
Johnny Mythen (Wexford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I am not a scientist, what does "high status" mean?
Johnny Mythen (Wexford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
What are those standards? There must be a figure. I would like to know what it is.
Johnny Mythen (Wexford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Have any studies been done in Europe, to compare?
Johnny Mythen (Wexford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Which country has the best practice in this regard?
Dr. Eimear Cotter:
Every country is different in terms of their ecosystems and what is living in their waterways. An inter-calibration is done across the EU so that a high ecological assessment in Ireland is comparable to other countries such as Germany or Greece, for example. Based on that ecological assessment, each country derives the nitrates standard for rivers. In Ireland, that is done by the EPA. Comparability across the EU is part of our work under the water framework directive.
Johnny Mythen (Wexford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Are the standards the same in each country?
Johnny Mythen (Wexford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Is our standard higher than any other European country?
Johnny Mythen (Wexford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The figure of 30% non-compliance of farms inspected was given. How many farms were inspected in from 2022 to 2023? What does the 30% refer to?
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
There is going to be a significantly higher level of inspections. Is that correct?
Johnny Mythen (Wexford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I presume there are qualified personnel in each local authority.
Mr. Patrick Byrne:
Yes. This is what I mean. At the moment they are in the process of recruiting. The level of resources there prior to 2022 was approximately 11 full-time equivalent inspectors spread nationally. The allocation is an additional 57 to be dedicated to agricultural inspections. The latest figure we have is that 27 of those positions have been filled. They are still in a recruitment process to fill the balance.
On the Deputy's question, to date we have put in place and have run two training courses, which were led by local authority and Department of agriculture inspectors to bring them up to speed and train them into the job. The inspectors largely come from science backgrounds as well.
Johnny Mythen (Wexford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Have any inspections been done on major reservoirs in terms of nitrates?
Johnny Mythen (Wexford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The main reservoirs in the country.
Johnny Mythen (Wexford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Has the EPA set up a specific programme for farmers?
Johnny Mythen (Wexford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
On how to reduce the nitrates, buffer zones and so forth.
Dr. Eimear Cotter:
That is not a space that we in the EPA gets into directly. We monitor what is happening in the water environment. We engage closely with Teagasc, where it makes sense to do that, in providing that data. Teagasc has just launched a new water quality campaign this year, which is built on our data. We make these data accessible to them. It is certainly something that we were very engaged in but we do not directly engage with farmers one on one. We support those that do.
Johnny Mythen (Wexford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Would the EPA recommend Teagasc to set up a programme for it?
Johnny Mythen (Wexford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank the witnesses.
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I welcome the EPA officials this evening. Senator Lombard covered a lot of the direction I was going. I just have a couple of questions. I am aware the witnesses have responded to Deputy Mythen on the inspectors and that the EPA does not do policy or enforcement other than the inspections with the council. From our perspective, however, and for the purposes of the report this committee will put together, we are pro-derogation. I am not saying that the EPA is anti-derogation but for the purposes of our report, and aside from enforcement of what is already there, what is one thing the officials here would like to see change that would have a positive effect on water quality? That one thing, however, cannot be to stock reduction.
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Well, there can be enforcement. Enforcement is very much on the field of play. For the purposes of getting the information for our report, and we are keeping the derogation for the purpose of this conversation, what would the EPA like to see happen then? Given the reductions in emissions announced during the week, even with a growing population and an expanding economy, we can surely get to a situation where we can increase and improve our water quality even with a growing herd and industrial expansion. How do we get to that mix?
Dr. Eimear Cotter:
First, it is around compliance. We know improvements can be made through compliance with good agricultural practice regulations. Mr. Byrne has talked through that. That focus should be there and we would like to see that in the committee's report.
The other point is the impact of the agricultural sector on water quality is not just about derogation farmers. All farmers have a role to play in improving water quality, be that nitrates in risky soils or phosphorous. Looking at the data and the maps the EPA is producing, the targeting of measures to address issues in those areas is critically important for improving water quality. Agriculture is not the only pressure on water quality. On page seven of our opening statement we look at the multipressure environment and seeing where the other pressures are coming from. They will all need to be addressed to improve water quality.
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Going back to points made by other members on enforcement and inspections, what are the penalties? If non-compliance is found, are the local authorities and the EPA tied in with the Department of agriculture? Is it a penalty from the single farm payment or whatever? What are the penalties?
Mr. Patrick Byrne:
There is a number of options. Advisory notices and a report on the inspection is the very starting point. This would be for the more minor issues. They will be followed up by a follow-up site visit or farm visit in this case. Escalation of that could be a cross report to the Department of agriculture by the local authority after the local authority inspection. In that way its cross report means it is actually a report to Department of agriculture, which then evaluates whether there should be financial penalty under the single farm payment, as it used to be. In really severe cases where there is actually discharged water or a blatant and significant water pollution incident, there is the option of prosecution either under the CAP regulations or the water pollution Acts. A provision for escalation is available in the legislation.
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
In an earlier answer to the Chairman, Mr. Byrne said it was picking people for inspection based on water pressure points across the board and not just whether the farmer is derogation or non-derogation? Is it any farmer in an area where the EPA sees and highlights a water problem?
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I am aware we have been through this before but I would like some clarification. The EPA does actual physical water testing and water sampling but it also does a lot of modelling. In response to Senator Lombard, Dr. Cotter said the EPA would have a better idea next year because they would have the fertiliser database register. What influence should the fertiliser register have on a report the EPA would give? Is it not just based on the quality of the water? I will use this simple analogy: if I spread 10 tonnes of nitrogen in a certain area in the morning, it might do absolutely no damage to water whereas someone else could spread half a tonne on the same day in an area that could have an astronomical effect on the water. Knowing how much is being spread, should the EPA not be able to tell that from its water samples? Should this not be all about water sample testing rather than modelling as if the EPA did not know what other information there is? It can be misleading at times.
Dr. Eimear Cotter:
It is all about the water sample information. I will hand over Dr. Deakin on this. My point on the fertiliser register was that the 18% reduction in chemical fertiliser is a national figure. We do not know where that reduction happened. If we are to be able to see this come through in water quality results, the question is: where are those reductions are happening? Are they happening on risky soils? That would then translate into improved water quality. Ultimately, we will looking what happens in the water. My point on the register-----
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
With the greatest respect I would expect the EPA to be able to answer the question I am asking. The EPA should be able to tell us from its water testing and sampling where it is happening. I thought this is how the process works.
Ms Mary Gurrie:
We will be able to tell where nitrogen levels or phosphorus have gone down or gone up in each and at each sampling point in each water body. We can say that but with regard to what has happened in that area is the bit where the modelling comes in. The water data in the monitoring tell us the position, the level, the concentration and the biology but we are looking in these models for information on what went on to explain what is going on with the monitoring results. This is where the fertiliser-----
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
In the water it tests, has the EPA seen the correlation to the reduction that it knows through the data, though the registers or through purchase?
Ms Mary Gurrie:
The nitrate levels in 2023 were almost exactly the same as those in 2022. We have not seen any change. The question being asked is whether we will see it and why we have not seen it. That is where there is a lack of information about what is going on in the environment and on the land. There is a gap in trying to explain that.
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
That leads to my next question, which is about lag time. The EPA said earlier that it could be six months to a year before results would be seen in water from actions taken. I would like to get an idea of the timing going back to the derogation. What EPA report will be used in Brussels when the D day call about whether we get the derogation is made and when will the testing for the report have been done?
There are three lag times. In 2026, will Brussels be working on a 2024 report, which reports tests from 2023, although we have taken a whole lot of reduction measures under ACRES? We could be going into the meeting that decides whether we get a derogation and we could be working off 2022 or, at best 2023, data, with no allowance made for all the measures taken in 2022. The EPA stated it can take six months to a year, so what was done in 2022 will not have shown up in 2023 and if the tests the report is based on were done in 2023, it could be 18 months or two years down the line and a whole lot more measures may have been taken. I want to get an idea of what report will be on the table on D day when the decision will be made on the derogation and when the testing will be done for it.
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The EPA published the 2023 data in June 2024. That is one lag I am talking about. We are working on 2023 tests in June 2024. That is the first time we see the results. If the tests were done in 2023 and Dr. Cotter says there is a lag time of between six months and a year needed for improvements to be seen, realistically we do not see the results of the 2023 actions until the 2024 tests. That is the point I am making.
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I am asking about the report.
Dr. Eimear Cotter:
-----so I cannot say what data will be used. I can say what we will publish. In June, we published 2023 data. Next year in June, under the nitrates directive, we will publish results from 2024 and we will have the full three-yearly assessment in the second half of 2025. That is what we will come out with next year. It will be the same the following year. We will be back to the indicators, rather than the three-yearly assessment in 2026.
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The point I am trying to make in a roundabout way, or perhaps I am not explaining myself well-----
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Let us say the decision on the derogation is being made in July 2025. Brussels will probably work off the EPA report from June 2025, which will use the 2024 tests, which Dr. Cotter said earlier will probably not yet show improvements from actions taken a year earlier, in 2023. It will be hard. This is not a criticism. It is impossible on the day the decision is made to have up-to-date data. We could find out in 2027 that all the actions taken in 2022, 2023 and 2024 worked brilliantly and we have super water and the derogation could be gone.
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I am trying to get an angle on how close to D day the tests will have been done.
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The report will always be a year behind. It is not an issue. I just wanted to get my head around it for arguments going forward.
Joe Flaherty (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I will do the good bits first. Without being patronising, as a committee we are predominantly a male bastion so it is fantastic to see that 75% of the speakers are female and from a science background. As the Government is constantly trying to encourage more young people and especially women into science, today is a heartening day. That is part of the good news.
The other good news is that the witnesses are here in a good week for agriculture in that emissions are down 4.6% and the use of synthetic nitrogen is down 18%. That is a good news story.
I will pick up on the point Senator Daly spoke about. Despite the EPA's best efforts, we will always be a year behind in reporting. Given the challenge we face in agriculture and the one we face globally, we do not want to become a science laboratory in Ireland. We are still one of the foremost food producers in the world. The world population is growing by 1 billion people per year. Poverty levels are rampant and escalating across the world and there is an onus on us to remain a primary and key quality food producer in the world. That is an important role we have to play, notwithstanding the environmental challenge. Has the EPA ever stated that it is in the national interest or that there is a possibility or scope to do an interim report on water quality? We should be able to report on data from January to June in December 2024?
Dr. Eimear Cotter:
We have not looked at that. We produce our data on an annual basis. They are the indicators we talked through. We produce those every year and we produce a three-yearly assessment every three years to give a comprehensive picture of what is happening on a full-year basis. We have not looked at doing it every six months.
Joe Flaherty (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
There is a tradition in the Civil Service not to do something this year that was not done last year. However, we are at a particularly challenging point for agriculture in Ireland. Is there capacity in the EPA to look at doing a January to June 2024 report on water quality to be published in December 2024?
Joe Flaherty (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I appreciate that it would be a snapshot, but it would give us an insight into whether we are getting improvements. At the moment, we are taking a leap of faith as we will not see the improvements in the reduction of nitrogen use for six to 12 months. At least, if we could see an indicative report in December this year for January to June 2024, we would know we are on the right track and it would arm us with the information we need to make a compelling case.
Joe Flaherty (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Will Dr. Cotter come back to the committee on whether the EPA can do an interim six-month report in December?
Joe Flaherty (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Exactly.
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
If it showed an improvement, we would accept it. If it did not, we would say it is wrong.
Joe Flaherty (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The EPA could send us a draft report.
Joe Flaherty (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The water quality report is very good, but there is never specific mention in it of wastewater. Agriculture is mentioned many times and I appreciate that we are the primary source of nitrates in water, but the next one is wastewater. Can the EPA give us an indication of whether there have been improvements and what it is doing in enforcement? If there is a rogue in the room, there is a fellow rogue in the room, which is wastewater.
Dr. Eimear Cotter:
I have included on page 7 of the opening submission a chart that shows the main pressures on water quality. It shows 15 of them. The grey is 2018, the blue is 2021. The most prevalent pressure is agriculture, and wastewater is the fourth most significant pressure. It has been going down in recent years as a result of investment by Uisce Éireann in wastewater infrastructure, but it is still affecting 200 water bodies.
It is not correct to say that we do not call that out and we do not fulfil our role in terms of highlighting where those pressures are in terms of inadequately treated wastewater. We are the environmental regulator for Uisce Éireann and are carrying out inspections on wastewater and drinking water treatment plants on an annual basis. We are taking prosecutions where they are warranted. We have taken 28 prosecutions in total against Uisce Éireann for wastewater and nine for drinking water. Our focus is not solely on agriculture. We need to see all of these pressures come down to see water quality improve.
Joe Flaherty (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
My next question is about enforcement and is directed at Mr. Byrne. There has been no significant change in the biological quality of rivers or waters. There have been some improvements but these have been offset by the declines in other areas. If I was looking after enforcement, I would do it strategically on key areas. Can Mr. Byrne set out a map in terms of enforcement? Is the EPA targeting the south east for agriculture? Could he paint a picture of where the EPA's enforcement energies are being targeted?
Mr. Patrick Byrne:
It is not specifically targeted at the south east. I return to the allocation of resources. There were approximately 11 full-time equivalents prior to the additional resource being allocated. The Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage allocated 57 additional staff, who have been assigned to the local authorities across the country on the basis of the number of water bodies at risk with agriculture identified as a significant pressure.
Joe Flaherty (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Are all those 57 positions filled?
Mr. Patrick Byrne:
No. As I said earlier, 27 is the latest number I have. That number of water bodies that are identified as at pressure primarily from agriculture has dictated where the inspectors have been assigned. They have been assigned across the whole country across all local authorities. Obviously, there are slightly more of them in some of the bigger counties or counties with higher numbers of at risk water bodies.
Joe Flaherty (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
We did 1,000 inspections for agriculture in 2022 while 1,100 last year were targeted and the number for 2024 was 3,500. What was the number at the end of June?
Joe Flaherty (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The EPA must have some indication.
Joe Flaherty (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
At best, will we be under 2,000 for this year?
Joe Flaherty (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
There is obviously a failing on the part of some of these local authorities in that they have been given the posts and they are not filling them.
Mr. Patrick Byrne:
I cannot comment. I do not know. The allocations have been the positions that were allocated to the local authorities towards the end of 2023. They have been filled. They were allocated in two batches. The balance of them were allocated in early 2024 so those positions remain to be filled.
Joe Flaherty (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I know the EPA is very politically correct with its answers but are there rogue local authorities that are not shouldering their weight?
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I do not think that is a fair question.
Joe Flaherty (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
We have targets for water quality to 2027. Obviously the EPA is looking at the figures and real-time reports. It is dependent on an annual report that is at best dated. From where the EPA is sitting, does it see itself attaining those 2027 targets given where we are now and the likely projections in terms of progress? Are the water quality targets for 2027 attainable?
Dr. Eimear Cotter:
We have said that it is a huge challenge. A total of 54% of our waters are in satisfactory condition so they have good or high ecological status. We have said that it is a huge challenge to get from 54% to 100% and have identified where the gaps are. Does Dr. Deakin wish to speak to that?
Dr. Jenny Deakin:
It is certainly an enormous challenge given where we have come from. The water framework directive has been in place since the 1990s and the target for 2027 has been there since then. Here we are a few years out and we are still at 54% so there is an enormous trajectory to get through in a short space of time to reach the 2027 target.
Joe Flaherty (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
What do we need to do to move that dial?
Dr. Eimear Cotter:
It involves looking at all of the pressures. In agriculture, it is not just derogation farmers. I know that is the focus here. It involves all farmers and involves looking at the issues, targeting our measures at the right place and looking at the other pressures that affect water quality. The second most significant pressure is physical changes to our water environments - our draining, dredging, channelisation and physical barriers. We are improving our knowledge there about how this impacts water quality. This is a pressure that needs to be addressed. Forestry is the third most significant pressure. Again, a significant number of bodies are impacted by forestry and that will need to be addressed. The fourth issue is urban wastewater discharges. All of these pressures need to be tackled. We are dealing with each of the sectors. We have a lot of engagement. The focus on water quality has never been greater. All sectors, including the agricultural sector, are keen to - as I showed those bar charts earlier - reduce the number of water bodies and reduce their sector in terms of being on the pressure list.
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Regarding forestry, is it nitrates or phosphorous that is the issue?
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
So it is not specifically a nitrates issue.
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Going by the reports done by the EPA and if it has to send a report next year, I know the witnesses have said it is an annual report. Regarding the report that has already gone to Europe on nitrates, would it be any better than what was sent before?
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Yes.
Ms Mary Gurrie:
What I can say from our indicators report this year is that there was not a lot of change in 2023 versus 2022. We have seen nitrate levels increasing since around 2020, particularly in the south and south east, and they are stuck at too high a level. We cannot predict ahead but that is where we are at now.
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I think there was one derogation farmer in Leitrim and he is gone. Based on reports, levels of phosphorous in Leitrim was high. Leitrim is covered in forestry. Was this the cause of it?
Dr. Jenny Deakin:
There is a mix of issues in the counties in the west compared to the south east. Nitrates are typically high in the south, south east and east. There is a mix of pressures in counties in the west. There is an agricultural contribution, although it is not necessarily related to the level of intensity of farming. We had a bit of this earlier with regard to one of the earlier questions. The issue with phosphorous is more about the poorly drained soils and the run off bringing the sediment and phosphorous from what are sometimes very low stocked farms. It is not a stocking rate relationship. It is more about-----
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The west would have a high percentage of forestry. I see the EPA has done a chart on the pressures and it looks at it nationally. Leitrim is down as being high in phosphorous. Is that down to forestry because a huge percentage of the county is forestry?
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Is it possible to get that? Does the EPA have that information?
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
People involved in the farming groups, including one in Senator Paul Daly's county, and farmers around the country are watching a lot of what is going on and are getting proactive. There seems to be considerable runoff. When you see green grass growing behind a sewage treatment plan, you know that something is coming out, to put it simply. The farming community is sending us photos, day in and day out, taken near sewage treatment plants around the country. Farmers have got proactive in watching these developments. I am talking about phosphorous. There was clear water before the treatment plants but it is not looking so good now. We can send those photos to the EPA. In many treatment plants in this country, the more it rains, the fewer the number of loads that are taken out. The finer the weather, the more loads are taken out. The EPA is supposed to be monitoring. Lorries go into sewage treatment plants and suck out from the tanks. Ironically, the more it rains, the fewer the number of loads. The EPA gets reports from Uisce Éireann. The EPA can see the numbers of loads that are moved from one place to another treatment plant to be sorted. That data is there. In many places, movement of loads has to happen and the EPA has this data. July of last year, for example, was very wet. Why are fewer loads taken out when there is more water flying around the place and coming through wastewater, storm water and foul water than is the case during dry weather? Can the witnesses answer that question?
Dr. Eimear Cotter:
I am not sure of the detail. We are the environmental regulator for Uisce Éireann. We are equally focused on reducing the pressure from inadequately treated wastewater. The EPA has put together a priority list comprising 73 areas for Uisce Éireann and directing where we want to see investment to improve water quality. The inspection programme happens on an annual basis.
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I take Dr. Cotter's point.
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I understand that inspections happen on an annual basis.
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Is anybody checking on the recording in every plant? Dr. Cotter mentioned 73 areas. How many Uisce Éireann plants are there around the country?
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Would it be fair to say that the EPA is looking at 15% of them? Dr. Cotter mentioned 73 sites.
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Is there any person-----
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
That is all right. Dr. Cotter said "on an annual basis". Does she mean once a year?
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
What is the average?
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
That is all right. I am throwing out a question to the witnesses. I presume the EPA has all the records of every plant in Ireland. Is that the case?
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The records of the loads that are taken out and brought to another treatment plant. There is a flow meter. I will put it simply for anybody who understands sewerage. There is a flow meter in and a flow meter out. When you treat your sewage, you have a flow meter going out that indicates how many cubic metres have been let out and a flow meter going in that indicates how many cubic metres have come in. Some of the sewage will be taken out to be treated somewhere else if the plant in question is not fit to treat it. Do the witnesses understand where I am coming from? Are the volumes of what comes in and goes out, and what is taken away, looked at by the EPA? I know what I am talking about in this regard. I am putting to the witnesses that in wet weather, more cubic metres should be going through because of the volumes. If you can only cater for 100 cu. m per hour, you cannot cater for 150 cu. m per hour so you have to take some away. Is anybody in the EPA following the volume in cubic metres that come in and go out on all the flow meters? Is there a data record of that? Is it in the possession of the EPA? Is there someone analysing it? That is how we will know if sewage is being fully treated or going down a river or whatever else, or is being taken away. That is the ABC. It is like doing maths. Does the EPA have somebody looking after those 500 plants and analysing every aspect? What have those figures shown? I have seen things going on and other people have reported other things going on. I am not shocked that phosphorous levels in Ireland are high. I would be wary that farmers are taking the brunt of the blame for phosphorous when there may be a bigger problem in other areas. That is what I am putting to the witnesses.
Mr. Patrick Byrne:
I can try to address the question somewhat for the Deputy. As Dr. Cotter outlined, a little more than 500 wastewater discharge licences have been issued to Uisce Éireann. They specify the level of treatment and the quality of the discharge that they are allowed to emit to receiving water, whether that is a river, the sea or whatever else. Those licences also specify the level, detail and frequency of monitoring that Uisce Éireann must undertake. That data is submitted to the EPA and is looked at. The specifics of the movement between sites may not be. The licence is a discharge licence for discharging to receiving water. The focus is on the discharge.
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I take Mr. Byrne's point and thank him for answering. I am asking about the EPA's monitoring. Say I have a sewage treatment plant. It is like having a 100 horsepower tractor and a 200 horsepower tractor, to put it simply. Our witnesses will know what I am on about. For processing, one plant could be twice the size of another. Does the EPA know the amount of sewage that comes into the plants? Does the EPA have that data? Does it have the data for the volume in cubic metres of sewage treated in a plant, the amount that goes out and the capacity of the plant? Does the EPA have that data for the 500 plants in Ireland?
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I am asking about the volume in cubic metres of raw sewage that is coming in to be sorted. In some cases, in fairness, the sewage is taken away by lorries and brought to a bigger plant. Does the EPA have that information? It would be worthwhile for the EPA to look through the records. It contradicts everything that I was brought up with that in wet weather, fewer loads are brought away from plants than is the case in dry weather. That has me bamboozled and I am a while looking at that game. I cannot understand why that is the case and would like to know how it is happening.
Dr. Jenny Deakin:
When we are doing our assessments, what really matters is what is going on in the river. If there is a problem in the river, no matter the source, we will pick that up in the monitoring data. We work back from there to figure out where it is coming from. If it is coming from a wastewater treatment plant, we will see that. As the Deputy mentioned, upstream is different to downstream. We have the monitoring data and the experiences of the representatives of local authorities and the local authority waters programme, LAWPRO, who are doing stream walks to try to pin down the issues. What matters to us is water quality. We pick up those problems and them it is over to Irish Water to figure out how to fix them if they are caused by a plant.
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I am thinking of the likes of the derogation. Let us think of a scenario whereby every farmer puts every drop of water they have into a tank and never puts out slurry.
Near me, in Ballymoe, County Galway, is one of the cleanest rivers - you can look it up - the Island River. There are monitoring stations along it. Unfortunately, a treatment plant was supposed to be done for the past seven, eight or ten years. When it comes to that point, the water quality is not as good. If it is contaminated, the water quality will not be as good and puts it down. When the EPA does an overall assessment of water quality in Ireland, I presume it states that the river is not in good condition, even though four fifths of it is. Is that fair to say?
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I think it is four.
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
When it comes into the last phase, it gets into a bit of bother, although I know it is earmarked to be done up. When the EPA does its overall report, because that treatment plant has not been brought up to the specifications, does that bring down the good part? How does it work?
Dr. Jenny Deakin:
It is ultimately based on the monitoring data. If the monitoring data are unsatisfactory, that water body needs to be targeted for action. Then, we figure out what action the water body needs. It is more driven by what the monitoring data tells us than what is happening at a treatment plant.
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The Department of housing was in here and its representatives said the model Europe wants us to use is not the model it would use. Does the EPA have anything to say about that? My understanding is the EPA gets data about how many cattle are in an area and how many treatment plants or whatever. Has that modelling ever been looked at to see that it is accurate? Is there a different type of modelling the EPA looks at as well, to be doubly sure? There is many a thing in farming you are told is the right way but you find out it might not be as good as another way; that is what I want to find out.
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
It was peer-reviewed in journals.
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Are there other models?
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I might come back on the plants. Does the EPA know the cubic metres coming in and going out for every plant?
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Dr. Cotter may come back to the committee about that.
Michael Collins (Cork South West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank our guests for being with us today. If there is an infringement on a farm near me and the EPA is made aware of it, what are the laws? Where does the EPA come into play? Does the EPA apply the fine? Does it communicate with the farmer? What happens?
Mr. Patrick Byrne:
For clarity, the EPA does not do inspections of farms for compliance with good agricultural practice. That is primarily undertaken in local authorities by local authority inspectors. As outlined earlier, if they come upon a minor issue, an advisory notice issues to the farmer and there is probably a follow-up inspection. If it is more significant, they may cross-report it to the Department of agriculture which will evaluate whether it will impose a fine or penalty. If it is much more significant, the Department may take a prosecution under the water pollution Act or good agricultural practice regulation.
Michael Collins (Cork South West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The EPA identifies the problem in the river, the farmers in the surrounds will be notified of the issue and the local authority will try to identify the farm causing the problem. Is that what Mr. Byrne said?
Mr. Patrick Byrne:
We have identified a number of inspections to be undertaken by each local authority based on the number of water bodies identified as impacted significantly by agriculture. Our advice to local authorities is to use the EPA maps to guide them as to where to go for the farm inspections to target more at-risk areas.
Michael Collins (Cork South West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I think the witness said earlier that the EPA is the regulator for Uisce Éireann. Is that correct? Yes. What happens if Uisce Éireann breaks the law?
Dr. Eimear Cotter:
We have an annual inspection programme in which we are out on site with Uisce Éireann. If there are issues at a plant, non-compliances are raised right through to prosecution. We have prosecuted Uisce Éireann 28 times in relation to wastewater plants and nine times in relation to drinking water. That is our role as the environmental regulator, which we have been fulfilling over the past number of years.
Michael Collins (Cork South West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I appreciate that. I attended a meeting last Thursday night in Shannonvale in Clonakilty. There is a sewage system there that has been leaking for 27 years. A public play park has been closed off and children have not been able to use it for the past 20 years. It could be Irish Water, it could be Uisce Éireann - it could be anyone. It is seeping down into the Argideen river, into Clonakilty, Timoleague and all that area - it is raw sewage. Uisce Éireann, the EPA and Cork County Council are aware of it. The Minister for housing was down last year. Everybody seems to be aware of it but nothing has happened for 27 years. Something stinks to the high heavens that a sewage system that has been burst for 27 years has never been repaired or replaced, which it obviously needs to be. It has caused a local play park to be closed off and frustrated every resident. Every rule and regulation is there to make sure farmers do not break the rules, which they should not, but the same regulation does not seem to apply in this case. It used to be the local authority and now it is Uisce Éireann. The EPA stated there are 70 areas of improvement recommended. Are they publicised in this document?
Michael Collins (Cork South West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I will check that out. The EPA is well aware of this case because it was brought up the last day. People can see, as I have seen myself, that areas have been cordoned off for 27 years and nothing has happened.
Michael Collins (Cork South West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Nobody wants to come back to me.
Ms Mary Gurrie:
We know there has been underinvestment in wastewater treatment plants for decades. That is the reality. We should have complied with the directive on wastewater treatment by 2015, I think. We are nowhere near it. The EPA's approach is to have a priority list based on criteria; raw sewage has to be eliminated. Some 200 water bodies are impacting directly on water quality and the European court has taken an infringement case on compliance with the urban wastewater treatment plant directive. There are 1,000 plants, a lot of which need work. I cannot speak to the specifics of the prioritisation process, as Dr. Cotter said, but a huge amount of work needs to be done on upgrading the wastewater treatment plant infrastructure. The EPA has a prioritised approach based on the environmental impact.
Michael Collins (Cork South West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank Ms Gurrie for her answer but my point is that as soon as there is an infringement, farmers are notified that they must correct it or be fined, and they will most likely be fined anyhow, whether it is corrected or not. It looks as if there is one law for one and another law for the other. How can it be that a plant leaks to the point of closing off a play park, flowing into a river and the drinking pipe for the mains water in Clonakilty and no one gives a damn?
Michael Collins (Cork South West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
It is hugely important. It affects thousands of people.
Dr. Eimear Cotter:
In terms of our environmental regulator role with Uisce Éireann, we carry out functions in that regard. We carry out an annual inspection plan and we are working through non-compliances. Incidences are reported to us and we have taken prosecutions, where necessary. I cannot speak to the specifics of the case the Deputy raised. There is no one rule for one sector and another for a different sector.
We are taking the issues around wastewater as seriously as we are with agriculture.
Michael Collins (Cork South West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
If it came to a farmer, he would not be given 26 or 27 years to clean up his mess. I would not expect him to either.
Michael Collins (Cork South West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Is the report referring to Shannonvale public to see what communications the EPA has made with Uisce Éireann to make improvements? Are they part of these 70 areas for improvement that have been recommended? Will the witnesses communicate this back to me?
Michael Collins (Cork South West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
There is a big imbalance there. When it comes to the agriculture sector, everything must be put right and it should be right. When it comes to Uisce Éireann or the council, which was in charge of this for many years, however, there seems to be some leniency and movement and it can drag on for 20 years.
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
There is frustration for farmers. There is significant investment going into farms to try to improve water quality. There are many different recommendations being put in place for compliance, etc., to try to improve soil water, to stop roadways, moving water tanks, etc. There is also protected urea. There are 31 in total that derogation farmers must adhere to. It is frustrating to see a local town where the sewerage plant is not up to capacity and is having an impact on water quality. It is frustrating for individuals when they are doing A,B,C and D but the investment that is needed to get waste water treatment plants up to capacity is not being made. I can name several sizeable villages in my own county that have no waste treatment plant and are using the nearby river instead to put raw sewage into. We are in the 21st century. It is not the witnesses' fault but it is definitely not good enough.
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
We are not questioning that. I just wanted to express the frustration that is there. I want to go back to forestry for a minute. It was said that forestry is the third biggest contributor. When land is planted, the gate is closed for the next 20 years and no on goes near it. Is there something that can be done by Coillte or by private landowners to stop this? It is not coming from chemical nitrogen because there is a spit sprayed when it is planted. After that, no fertilizer is put on forestry. If it is the third largest contributor, is there something that can be done at forestry or farm level to improve the run-off from forestry?
Dr. Jenny Deakin:
The issues tend to happen in the forestry areas when there is some forestry activity. That can be when the forest is being planted, thinned or when it is being clearfelled. In between those periods when the forest is stable, we tend to see water quality being good. When we see those events and forestry activities happening, we get a decline. There is a definite correlation between activity, and activity is spread out throughout the coupes in any catchment at any one time. The forest service and the regulations it operates under has measures to prevent those impacts occurring, when those are in place and they are operating properly. There are challenges we must acknowledge with the legacy sites-----
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
When Dr. Deakin says activity, that means clearfelling or tilling. That applies to a very small percentage of forestry in any one year, and still it is the third highest contributor. It is hard to align that with the fact it is only when activity is taking place. When there is heavy rainfall, water comes off forest land much more quickly than it would come off grassland. Does that have an impact on the water quality?
Dr. Jenny Deakin:
The issues we normally see associated with forestry are the sediment, drainage and habitat condition, followed by the phosphorus. As we discussed earlier, it is not typically a nitrate problem scenario. It is more about the sediment and the drainage and the phosphorus coming from the brash after the clearfelling has happened.
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I will ask one more question. When we talk about free draining soils, we have forestry split. Can this be divided between the other farm enterprises, dairy and tillage specifically, in respect of what proportion of the nitrates would be attributed to each sector? We see a problem in the areas where we have a high level of tillage or nitrates, and that is where there is a blackspot. Can we distinguish between farming enterprises as regards the contributors to water quality?
Dr. Jenny Deakin:
Similar to the discussion we had earlier, where we have identified a water quality problem and know at national level the likely pollution sources for that problem, that gets referred on to LAWPRO, whose representatives go out and walk up the streams to figure out which farm, forestry coupe or pipe is causing the issue. They can localise the effort to figure out precisely what actions are needed to rectify the issue. Our starting point is always what is going on in the water quality.
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
We have a figure for forestry that it is the third highest contributor. We do not have that figure for tillage or dairy as regards-----
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Could that information be made available to us?
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I am just looking at the witnesses' graphs. What does the second one mean?
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
On dredging, when grass and drains are blocked up and are blocking water and they are cleaned out, the water gets discoloured and dirty. Once they clean out, however, it is perfectly clear water. Are the witnesses saying that cleaning drains is a bad thing?
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
When it is being taken up.
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Generally, when a small drain is being cleaned, you bring a bale of straw to put in to make sure that everything is soaked and it purifies in a way that will not damage the waters downstream. Would that be fair to say?
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I have another question relating to something the witnesses would have been involved in. At present, we are hearing about Ireland needing to meet targets such as planting another 500,000 ha of trees. That is written in every document I read. It will cause chaos on our water quality if it is the case that forestry is the third biggest contributor to nitrates. It is one thing pushing against the other because the water needs to be minded. If another 500,000 ha of trees are put in, with the best will in the world there will be run-off from them. Is this not an awful contradiction?
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
To be honest about it, though, and not being smart, there will be a drain or a river near any bit of forest planted.
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I come from a farming background. No matter where you go now in Ireland, there is nowhere that planting trees will not result in run-off down to some drain or river. When people planted forestry one time, they did the mounding and there was a system where it took out all the material. It is delusional to think we are going to sow 500,000 ha of trees and still get better water quality. In fairness to the EPA, it is trying to do one thing, while the relevant Department is trying to do another. The two will not add up, one way or the other. I thank the witnesses for answering my questions.
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I call Senator Daly.
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I would like to get a better idea of how the EPA does its tests and reports. Deputy Fitzmaurice used the example of his river. Now, if I use mine, the River Brosna rises just outside Mullingar and flows into the River Shannon at Shannon Harbour. At how many different points along it would the EPA take water samples on a river that length? What would be the result given for that river? Would it be an average of each point or could the same river be included in a different category depending on how far upstream or downstream it is? We would assume-----
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I am just using that river as an example; it could be any river. The Brosna rises at Lough Owel and flows through Mullingar. It has gone through very little land. We would assume that if we took a sample of water from the river and tested it then, it would nearly have to be spot on. It then flows on through Kilbeggan into Clara and passes through more and more farmland and more and more towns and villages until it flows into the River Shannon at Shannon Harbour. If the river is picking up anything, we would assume it has picked it up by the time it gets to Shannon Harbour. If samples were to be taken in Shannon Harbour and Mullingar, there would be bound to be a serious difference between them. How would the EPA categorise that river?
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
That would be along each river.
Ms Mary Gurrie:
Yes. It breaks them up into stretches for management purposes and the reason this is the case is to address exactly the problem the Senator described. As a rule, the best quality rivers are usually up in the highlands and the upper stretches. As the Senator said, rivers gather the various pressures on them as they flow down their courses. This is why the estuaries are generally in the worst condition. They are taking all the catchment water that comes into them. Each river water body is assessed. When we talk about 1,000 river water bodies, each one of these stretches is assessed. Sampling is done for the nutrients, such as nitrogen and phosphorous, between four and 12 times a year, depending on the stretch of river. The biology sampling is then done once every three years at least.
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
It is done on each individual stretch of river.
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Are they reported as per each individual stretch-----
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
-----or as an overall figure for a particular river?
Ms Mary Gurrie:
Each stretch has its water quality reported on and, as Dr. Deakin stated, the pressures on it. We might, for example, say that one stretch has no pressures and is fine, while the next stretch might flow past a wastewater treatment plant, agricultural activities or septic tanks. This approach, then, allows us to manage the measures that need to go in to fix that stretch of river.
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The EPA can identify whereabouts down along a river that the problem is starting or getting worse as it goes.
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
That is what I was coming at.
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
What length is a stretch?
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Approximately what length is each stretch?
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Right. I was just wondering how it is done. To ask a hypothetical, far-fetched question, going forward scientifically, can the witnesses ever see a day where there would be the potential for filtration to solve this problem?
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The problem of nitrogen, phosphates and sediments. Is it possible that filtration might solve this issue? I know this is a very hypothetical and far-fetched question.
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Sometimes when it is not possible to stop something from getting polluted, it is necessary to think about how to get the pollution back out.
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
No, I get that. As I said, I-----
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
It is a hypothetical and far-fetched question.
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Is there any possibility of science being able to develop some kind of filtration method with the water going through some kind of dam system? Is it the case that this is not even being thought about, explored or experimented with?
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Yes. I take the point.
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Deputy Mythen would like to ask a question.
Johnny Mythen (Wexford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
One point just struck me. Is there a high concentration of nitrates on coastlines in particular areas? How is this impacting the environment?
Dr. Eimear Cotter:
The main issues on nitrates that we are seeing are in the south and the south east and particularly manifesting in the estuaries in those areas. More than two thirds of the estuaries in Cork, for example, are impacted by high nitrates levels. We can see this impact in those areas in the form of the algae blooms. They are noxious and odorous and knock out any sort of healthy ecosystems there. The south and south east of the country are particularly impacted by high nitrates levels coming off the free-draining soils in those areas.
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank the witnesses. That is grand.
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The water framework directive was mentioned. In Europe, we are on the higher scale for having good quality water compared with some countries. Is this correct?
Dr. Eimear Cotter:
Right. This aspect comes up a lot. There is the nitrates directive and we are doing relatively well when we look at our water quality under this directive because we are measured against a high nitrates standard. For drinking water, this is 50 mg/L. If we look at Ireland through this lens, we do relatively well. If we were to look at Ireland through the lens of the water framework directive, which is looking at full ecological status, as we said earlier, 54% of our waters in Ireland are in a satisfactory condition. On average across the EU, that is 44%. We are, therefore, better in this regard. We are better than the average but we are still about mid-table in the EU. There are others that are better than us and others that are worse than us.
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The EPA has been a while on the go looking up water. A directive is a directive, but you can dream a dream and then you can have realism. Will we ever get to 100%? Being realistic, will this ever happen, be it in Ireland or in any other country in Europe? Have we brought in a directive that, to be honest, if 2027 is basically the date that people are on about for Europe, I am not saying for even Ireland alone, is this like dreaming a dream because it is not going to be a reality by 2027?
Dr. Eimear Cotter:
It certainly will be very challenging and we have said this already. We do not, though, think it is unrealistic to expect to have clean, healthy waters in Ireland. We know there are things that can happen, and we have gone through them here, to improve our water quality, in agriculture and other sectors. It is not, then, an impossible ask and there are improvements that can be made. We used to have 500 pristine water bodies in this country; we are now at 41. This number was lower, but it is getting better. We think-----
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Has the threshold not risen?
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The threshold has never risen.
Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Fair enough. I thank the witnesses.
Jackie Cahill (Tipperary, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I will let Deputy Danny Healy-Rae ask a question or two, but then there is going to be a vote in the House.
Danny Healy-Rae (Kerry, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I will be very brief. I have heard the talk all evening about water quality and nitrates. The nitrates mean farmers in trouble. I have been in here before talking about this subject. The nitrates derogation is impacting farmers who cannot meet the limit. A fellow with 58 cows who has sold ten cows is down to 48 cows. What focus is on local authorities where we do not have treatment plants that are up to scratch and this is impacting on water quality?
Danny Healy-Rae (Kerry, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Why is it that it is only the farmer being targeted? Why is nothing being done at all about treatment plants and local authorities? I am not really blaming the local authorities because it is the Government at the end of the day that should provide the funding to them to rectify and remedy these plants that are not up to scratch and increase the capacity. Why are farmers having to suffer financially and why do we not see the same focus of attention on the local authorities in the context of this problem?
We do not see the same focus of attention on local authorities and this problem.
I cannot understand another small aspect of this grant for treating septic tanks. Sometimes I have to ring the environment section of Kerry County Council to see if someone qualifies for the grant. A young girl asked me the other day whether she would qualify. The engineer at the other end of the line told me she will, but the people on the other side of the road will not. The fall of ground from both places is going towards the lakes of Killarney. How can it be that people on one side of the road do not qualify and people on the other side do?
Dr. Eimear Cotter:
We have covered wastewater over the course of the evening. We have as much focus on the other sectors that put pressure on water qualify as we do on agriculture. A graph on page 7 of our opening submission shows that urban wastewater is the fourth most prevalent pressure on water quality, affecting approximately 200 water bodies around the country. We are the environmental regulator for Uisce Éireann. In that capacity, we carry out annual inspection programmes. Non-compliance proceedings are opened when necessary. We take prosecutions when we need to. It is not correct to say there is not the same focus by the EPA on the role of wastewater on water quality as on the role of agriculture. However, it is also a fact that agriculture is the most prevalent pressure on water quality, affecting 1,000 water bodies around the country.
As outlined in the same graph on page 7 of the opening submission, septic tanks are the sixth most prevalent pressure on our water quality. We oversee the national inspection programme for septic tanks. The inspections are carried out by local authorities. There is a high non-compliance rate and 45% of 1,100 inspections carried out last year were non-compliant. We need to see those being fixed. We are not seeing the grant being taken up, despite the changes that were introduced recently. I cannot answer on the specific question as to why someone in one part of an area is eligible, while people in another part are not. I do not know whether anyone can add to that. It is not something I can answer.
Ms Mary Gurrie:
The grant is not from the EPA. It is a Government grant. It is targeted at areas where the problems are. It is available for places where there are water problems and where there have been inspections. However, I cannot comment on why one person in an area would be eligible and another would not. The Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage oversees the grant system, so it might be able to clarify that.
Danny Healy-Rae (Kerry, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
It feels like there is more focus on getting rid of the poor cows and a belief that will sort out the problem of deterioration in our water quality. I do not see the same focus by the Minster for the environment and the Minister for housing to rectify the situation. It is not possible to get permission for one more house in Moyvane village, which is a lovely satellite village about ten miles outside Tralee. There is no focus and no funding is being provided. We are all under the same sky.
It seems to be the case that farmers are suffering. This man - I will name him - Tim Early from Inchibeg, Rathmore, has the last house in Kerry going out the Millstreet road. He had to cut his cow numbers from 58 to 48. He had everything right, no bother in the world, but it was too expensive for him to rent more land. His young fella will not stay at home now. There is not enough there for him. That should not be the case.
A man called Professor Ray Bates died a few months ago. He was a climatologist. He said we should try to get emissions right but we should not make people suffer financially to achieve the goals because that is going over the edge. He is dead now. I read what he wrote in the Sunday newspaper.
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Does the Deputy have to vote?
Danny Healy-Rae (Kerry, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Yes, I had better go. Good luck to the witnesses. I thank them very much.
Paul Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
On behalf of the committee, I thank the witnesses for coming and for their contributions. It is very much appreciated and will be included in our final report.
The next public meeting of the committee will be at 5.30 p.m. on Wednesday, 25 September 2024. As there are no further matters for discussion, today's meeting is adjourned.