The European Court of Justice’s finding that Ireland has failed to adequately implement the EU habitats directive over many years is an indication of a gross failure of policy and implementation.
Inaction and poor management of internationally-important sites has imperilled Ireland’s most prized natural possessions, even when you take into account some difficult circumstances pertaining — vast numbers of special areas of conservation (Sacs) are on private land and nature protection has been appallingly underfunded for years.
In this case, a failure to protect “priority habitats”, especially blanket bogs and coastal lagoons, was highlighted. It also extends to endangered species, notably the freshwater pearl mussel.
Blanket bogs are invaluable wetlands that provide drinking water, store huge amounts of carbon, provide habitats for biodiversity and are a home for many of our most endangered species. Coastal lagoons are among the most vulnerable and economically important ecosystems on Earth.
How many sites were the focus of the case brought by the European Commission?
At the heart of the proceedings is the designation of a network of Natura 2000 sites for protection. In Ireland, this includes 165 special protection areas (SPAs) — under the birds’ directive — and 441 Sacs under the habitats directive. This forms an overall network of 606 sites (including 90 coastal lagoons), covering about 13 per cent of our land mass. A total of 423 Sacs were in scope for this case.
Is the timeline of the case relevant?
Yes, the judgment reflects the position before January 2019. The Government insists it has significantly improved designations since; including conservation measures and resourcing of habitat protection.
What are the particular challenges with Ireland’s Natura network?
Ireland differs from the majority of its European neighbours in terms of the relatively high proportion of Natura sites on privately owned land, with these landowners enjoying strong legal protections. Much of it is farmed land.
Other countries have large tracts of land in national ownership, much of which is untouched by human influence and is truly wild, whereas Ireland effectively has no land that is truly wild.
What progress have we made on issues raised in the case?
The National Parks and Wildlife Service has prime responsibility for the designation and protection of Sacs.
The financial crisis of 2008-2014 resulted in an almost complete collapse in its funding and consequently a serious impingement on its work to protect nature. Recovery in resources and staffing has been gradual. It has been restructured and now has a dedicated nature conservation directorate responsible for managing Natura sites.
As of today, more than 92 per cent (406) of the sites have completed the full designation process, with the remainder due to be completed before the end of this year.
Site-specific conservation objectives have been identified and published in respect of all 423 sites. Less than half of the 27,000 Natura sites in Europe have these objectives in place.
On identification and implementation of site-specific conservation measures, the position is more complex. The case alleged Ireland does not have necessary conservation measures in place at any of the sites. There are activities requiring consent and/or notifiable actions in place for every site but the National Parks and Wildlife Service acknowledges the need for better and more comprehensive measures to meet Natura objectives.
The case aside, how fares Irish nature?
Our habitats are struggling. Too many species are under pressure with many declining or going extinct. As highlighted by Pádraic Fogarty of the Irish Wildlife Trust, we remain far from seeing transformative changes on our doorstep that we know are needed if we are to implement environmental laws and ultimately address interlinked biodiversity and climate emergencies.