Failure at an applications screening stage on environmental or heritage grounds was the most common reason farmers were unsuccessful in applying for non-productive investments (NPI) funds under Agri-Climate Rural Environment Scheme (ACRES) in three co-operation zones.

The director of co-operation programmes across the Breifne, Leinster and Munster-south Connacht regions Fergal Monaghan has said that just under half of the NPIs applied for but rejected fell down for this reason.

The next most common reasons for applications not receiving approval was that the proposed NPI did not align with the Department of Agriculture’s scheme specifications and that an action was deemed not to contribute to the aims of ACRES.

Monaghan stated that bracken control, breeding wader ponds, wild cover strips and the planting of small woodland were among the NPIs with the highest rejection rates in the regions he oversees.

The screening process carried out on applications granted the green light to just one-third of these NPI applications in the first window ACRES farmers had to apply, Monaghan told a Teagasc Signpost webinar on Friday.

These rejection rates were significantly lower than the rejection rate of all applications, which stood at 15% in Breifne, 23% in Munster-south Connacht and 27% in Leinster.

Owl boxes in Leinster

Monaghan stated that Leinster’s rejection rate could at least partly be put down to the popularity of barn owl box applications which were not suitable for all applicants.

“We did have, unfortunately, a large number of inappropriately sited barn owl box applications, including very large numbers of applications very close to each other and applications that were too close to busy roads,” he said.

“We did have a very high failure rate for barn owl boxes and that did contribute to the higher rejection rate in Leinster where that action is so popular."

ACRES co-operation teams are currently conducting adviser training courses that are expected to address the issues that lead to some of these application failures.

“Hopefully, we can reduce the percentage of rejected actions in the second window through better quality applications and get that reduction in fails without that reduction in standards,” Monaghan told the webinar.

Popular NPIs

The first opportunity farmers in the co-operation regions mentioned above had to apply for NPIs saw the installation of gates, barn owl or kestrel boxes and water troughs as the investments with the highest popularity.

There were over 4,900, 4,300 and 2,600 applications submitted for each respective investment heading.

Monagan encouraged ACRES co-operation participants to consider applying for further NPIs, as there is a risk funding may not be accessible in later years of the scheme.

“The second window is just opened and will close on 31 October. The number of future windows will be limited. It is not determined yet, but it is not open-ended.

“It is very important that people make use of the opportunity to draw down funds and invest in habitats and water quality on their farm.”

Some of the reasons for low levels of applications for some NPI options can be put down to the systems operating in regions, such as low interest in winter stubble in the Munster co-operation area where there are very few tillage farmers, the ACRES co-ordinator said.

“For others, the reason is explained maybe by a lack of appreciation, a lack of communication by the CP teams of the Department on the utility of some of the actions and that is something that is in this round,” he added.

Screening applications

Monaghan stated that when the co-operation team is screening applications against the tests each investment must pass to receive approval, the process is not entirely blunt in rejecting applications where the investment can be justified.

These tests include a proposed action being 20m away from watercourses, whether or not the action could risk spreading invasive species and if bird boxes are placed sufficiently away from busy roadways.

Should computer-based screening tests return a fail on elements of investment eligibility, there is a limited opportunity for the co-operation team to overrule the rejection.

He said that this can be the case when bird boxes may be signed off on near watercourses where other actions which require ground works may not.

However, co-operation teams assessing applications cannot move the placement of an investment or allow it to proceed with additional conditions, meaning that accurate planning and high-quality applications are needed to ensure proposed actions can be funded.