conference report - Irish Uplands Forum

CONFERENCE REPORT July 2016

The Irish Uplands Forum

would like to thank our Sponsors for their support and without whom the conference could not have taken place:

Irish Uplands Forum: Resourcing Upland Communities Conference – Dunloe, Co Kerry, May 2016

‘Resourcing Upland Communities’ 26-27 May 2016

Introduction by Chairperson of the Irish Uplands Forum Mr Frank Nugent

The fifth conference organised by the Irish Uplands Forum since its inception in 1995 took place in the scenic village of Beaufort, gateway to the Gap of Dunloe in the heart of the MacGillycuddy Reeks, Ireland’s highest mountain range, in late May 2016. Fortune shone on the assembled and we enjoyed two days of glorious sunshine, particularly during the field trip to view the path repair work and visitor service facilities at Cronin’s Yard. Delegates including farmers, community activists, recreational users and tourism providers were in attendance from as far away as the Wicklow hills, the Blackstairs Mountains, the Glens of Antrim, the Mountains of Mourne, the Galtee Mountains, Inishowen in north Donegal, and from as close as the Black Valley across the Gap of Dunloe. The focus of the conference was on resourcing and building an effective network of upland community groups, who are active island-wide in the sustainable management of Ireland’s upland areas. Many of the iconic mountain landscapes and environments we enjoy in Ireland, such as Killarney to which tourists have thronged for over a hundred years, can benefit greatly from locallybased management partnerships to oversee local access arrangements, while managing path repairs and erosion control. To be effective, such partnerships need to be inclusive of representatives of hill-farming, hill-walking and other recreational user interests, local tourism enterprises, communities and local authorities, and other appropriate state bodies’ representatives. Such a body, the Reeks Mountain Access Forum, has been established in the MacGillycuddy Reeks since 2014 and is actively addressing permissible access arrangements, repairs and maintenance to over 40 kilometres of mountain paths that are used by over 100,000 people per annum. A report commissioned by IUF in 2015 has profiled twenty-five such upland groups across the island of Ireland and has found that all of them are in need of dependable annual funding and supports to become effective managers of their local environments. The 2016 conference programme addressed how to overcome this deficit and proposed the building of an island-wide network of Upland Management Groups, based on a model such as the Irish Walled Towns Network, which is managed by the Heritage Council. The conference was an engaging, informative and inspiring event to which the following account of the proceedings provides a snapshot and summary of events. It will hopefully lead to increased awareness of the need for integrated and structured support for upland communities from Government.


Irish Uplands Forum ‘Resourcing Upland Communities’ CONFERENCE REPORT The Irish Uplands Forum (IUF) 2016 Conference was held in Beaufort, south Kerry, close to the Gap of Dunloe in the shadow of the majestic MacGillycuddy Reeks. Delegates came from all over the island of Ireland, representing upland communities and a range of agencies who are concerned with how we will support and resource sustainable upland communities into the future in Ireland. The following provides a snapshot of the conference proceedings over two days, including lectures and a field trip, which were informative, engaging and “inspiriting” to paraphrase Robert Lloyd Praeger in ‘The Way that I Went’.

DAY 1

THURSDAY 26 MAY 2016

The Honourable Councillor Bobby O’Connell, Mayor of Killarney

Inaugural Welcome by Mayor of Killarney Municipal Area The Mayor welcomed all the delegates to the Kingdom of Kerry. Councillor O’Connell commented on the need for partnership and collaboration in maintaining upland environments, while facilitating recreational activities and tourism in the uplands. He acknowledged that working with landowners and farmers is crucial to achieve these objectives, while for the farmers it is an opportunity to learn new skills and diversify their offerings. The Councillor commented that the enhancement of the uplands for visitors must not be at the expense of the flora and fauna of these areas. Councillor O’Connell strongly endorsed the recent Mountaineering Ireland call for the sustained resourcing of the management of the Uplands, while respecting and protecting our natural heritage.

Dr.Brendan O’Keeffe Caroline Crowley Shane O’Sullivan Mary Immaculate College, University of Limerick

Socio-Economic Profile of Upland Areas of Ireland (IUF, 2016) The IUF recently commissioned Dr. Brendan O’Keeffe and his colleagues at UL to research the socio-economic profile of upland areas of Ireland. This provides an evidence-based approach to planning for upland communities in the future, based on analysis of census data from the period 2006-2011. The research reflects the tremendous changes that have been seen in farming over the recent four decades, involving rural restructuring, the valorisation of place and changing demographics linked to patterns of land ownership and farming practices. Policy Context Brendan referred to a number of key studies pertaining to the physical and cultural value of uplands, including Scott’s (2005) ‘Guide to Mountains’ and the importance in sustaining ecosystems and resource delivery, in terms of water storage and supply, landscape and scenery, biodiversity etc. Brendan reflected that landscape continually changes through natural processes, but has been accelerated over the past 50 years across Europe through restructuring.

1|P a g e


The UL research focused on a number of upland areas and does not include all uplands

In Rio de Janeiro 2012, governments were asked by the UN to incorporate mountain specific policies into national sustainable development strategies, reflecting the importance of mountains and policy making to underpin care for the mountains. However, policy can be conflicting, where Irish farmers since 1973 (on joining the EEC, now EU) were urged to increase productivity and increase herds, they were later urged to destock - this poses a major challenge particularly in marginal environments such as uplands. The OECD ‘Valorising Place; Promoting Growth in All the Regions’ 2012 report showed that rural regions display fastest growth in GDP per capita when they get the correct stimulatory investments. The EU’s Cohesion Policy (2014-2020) urged ‘community-led local development’ or CLLD, where integrated partnerships at local level would lead innovative and sustainable development systems for their own localities. Results of Research Looking at the CSO Census data for 2006-2011 in Ireland, 83,600 people live in the selected upland study areas (above 200m elevation); this compares to 120,000 people living in the Gaeltacht areas. The population in the study areas has increased by 8.5% in the five year period. The proportions of youth and elderly people are above the national average, but with relatively fewer 2|P a g e


numbers of in the 20-39 years age group. This means that there is lower ‘population vitality’ (reproduceability) as a result. The geographical constraints lead to high levels of private car transport, with more distal access to services such as education, health and employment. Employment levels are lower than national average, and there is a marked gender divide in out-of-home employment opportunities (lower than national average). Access to rural broadband likewise is lower than average, posing a further digital divide. Looking at the potential positives of the Uplands, nature and landscape can be seen as an opportunity. In Switzerland, there has been a vision and recognition of the amenity value of the Uplands since 1876, with economic transfers from richer cantons (counties) to support upland cantons. There are higher farm subsidies in the uplands to encourage sustainable management with public and private investments, all of which support enhanced community development. McHugh (2001) at NUI Maynooth reported on rural typology in Ireland and reflected that in Northwest Ireland, the landscape is not contributing to amenities and the economy as it is in Kerry, Connemara, Clare and Wicklow. In conclusion:  Young people are the future potential of upland areas;  Distinctiveness of place is an advantage;  Rural areas have greater capacity to recover from recession;  Geographical peripherality is NOT an excuse to do nothing in policy terms – there needs to be more decentralised power to local villages;  No one-size-fits-all ‘silver bullet’ solution; there are commonalities in upland areas, but with local and regional differences across Ireland;  There needs to be solidarity among communities and community-led local development (CLLD) is critical;  There needs to be coherent ‘Vision Planning’ that is ‘rural proofed’, with tailored approaches to suit specific circumstances locally.  There needs to be innovation in strategic policy and investment to support upland communities;

Audience Comments:

 

Frank Nugent Chairperson, Irish Uplands Forum On behalf of Dr. Mary Tubridy, IUF

Recreation changes the very uplands that we seek to protect. There needs to be strategic investment in upland areas to deliver the services that will generate local economic benefit. It was suggested to widen the scope of the study to include all areas above 200m, including forestry.

Report on Study of Upland Communities in Ireland (IUF 2016) Frank introduced the origins and ethos of the IUF, which aims to be a collective voice for groups advocating the sustainable management of upland landscapes. The IUF aims to form a national network of communities to coherently address the many challenges in sustaining agriculture, heritage and social networks due to aging populations, rural isolation and fragmentary supporting policies. Frank commented on the two recent studies commissioned by the IUF (O’Keeffe, 2016, above; and Hill 2016, below) to provide evidence-based research to support these objectives at a national level. The Upland Communities Study was commissioned by the IUF and conducted by Alan Hill from late 2015 to early 2016. The research involved in-depth interviews with members of 25 upland communities across the island of Ireland (see Figure below) and the report was circulated to all attendees at the 3|P a g e


conference and through the IUF website. Frank emphasised that the study provides a ‘snapshot’ in time and that the number of upland community groups is evolving constantly.

The Upland Communities study reflects: Huge pride among communities in their ‘places’, but they are battling depopulation of productive young people and consequent economic decline. Fragmentation of funding sources makes it difficult to plan ahead without multi-annual funding. Lack of coherent policy at national level to support upland communities; Common challenges but with local issues that require local solutions 4|P a g e


and different models; Partnership and combined talents are required among landowners, recreational users, communities, local and national authorities to address these challenges. The study’s recommendations include: Creation of a National Network of upland community groups to provide supports, shared learnings and opportunities; Produce a costed 5-year Strategic Plan (2016-2021); Develop early wins to secure landowner and community supports; Secure co-ordinated funding and resources Address training and development needs in integrated fashion for the network

Ms. Finola Moylette Principal Officer, Rural Recreation Division of the new Department of Regional Development, Rural Affairs, Arts and the Gaeltacht On behalf of Michael McHale

Comhairle na Tuaithe and the Mountain Access Project – An Update of Recent Developments Finola presented the reconfiguration of the new Department in 2016 and the role of the Rural Development division. Since its foundation, the division has focused on Comhairle na Tuaithe, the roll out of the National Countryside Recreation (NCR) Strategy; the Walks Scheme 2008; the ‘Leave No Trace’ programme and the delivery of the national Pilot Mountain Access Scheme. Ongoing issues include:  Permissive access for recreation in many parts of the country  Pilot Mountain Access Schemes  State Agencies Plan  National Indemnity Scheme for landowners and land managers  Review of the NCR Strategy Finola noted that there are 39 approved ‘National Waymarked Ways and Looped Walks’ operated under the Walks Scheme, which paid €1.8 million to 1900 members, mostly farmers, in 2015. This is administered by 12 Rural Recreation Officers (RROs) under administrative agreements. She also announced that the Programme for Government commits to a doubling of the budget for the Walks Scheme in the coming year, a welcome announcement for many landowners. The national Pilot Mountain Access Scheme has two pilots at Binn Shléibhe in Co. Galway and the MacGillycuddy Reeks in Co. Kerry, respectively. Following research by SLR Consulting, the Reeks Mountain Access Forum is in place, chaired by Mr. Stewart Stephens, working as a partnership of stakeholders to deliver a 5-year strategic plan. Comhairle na Tuaithe has a sub-group working on signage, a practical toolkit, and is working to deliver the National Indemnity Scheme. The Department is also rolling out the Rural Economic Development Zones pilot programme, which was set up in response to a recommendation by the CEDRA Report, administered by the Department. The Reeks Forum got funding following an application by the group. A Draft National Outdoor Recreation Plan for Public Lands and Waters in Ireland in underway – 15% of the Irish landmass is in public ownership. This will 5|P a g e


set in place a coherent strategy for recreational access to state owned lands (Coillte, Bord na Móna, Waterways Ireland, NPWS, CIE etc). The Department is seeking a derogation from EU for landowners who allow recreational access so that they can still qualify for full single farm payments without penalty for loss of productive land.

MacGillycuddy Reeks Mountain Access Forum– The Story So Far Dr. Stewart Stephens Chairperson MacGillycuddy Reeks Mountain Access Forum

Stewart provided his reflections on the establishment of the Reeks Mountain Access Forum, which is celebrating two years in existence since May 2014. Considerations: There are over 40 kilometres of pathways within the 100km2 area of the Reeks, all of which is privately owned. The long term viability of the permissive access currently agreed may be challenging: there are 130 landowners, mainly in commonage holdings, with increasing numbers of recreational users. There are 21 members of the Forum, working to agreed objectives and shared vision. All opinions are valid, with open and honest discussions. The Forum has achieved a continuum of small wins, which brings satisfaction and tangible benefits. Concerns include: Recreational users: many have no knowledge of private ownership and assume that the Reeks are publicly owned; Dogs continue to be an issue, with many people allowing dogs off leads – such that have had to ban them altogether. Some commercial guides are disrespectful to landowners and the Forum objectives. There is no Conservation Plan for the Reeks, despite the SAC status Challenge and Charity events place enormous pressure on the integrity of paths network and infrastructure, frequently leaving little economic spin off behind in rural areas. A pre-booking system is being introduced to control numbers and spread events and thus impacts. Vision for the Reeks - More visitors; More spend; More awareness; Less Impact People counters have been emplaced at key access points – more than 75,000 people accessed the Reeks from January - October 2015. Awareness building is undertaken via signage/ press/ social media Dogs are now prohibited entirely Meet and Greet Survey: 50% of recreational users are 35-50 years old; 75% male; 80% daytrippers. 75% spend less than €501; while 90% say would be happy to pay parking fee to support remedial work. What practical things has the Forum achieved?  Event Sheets to be filled for event planning  Positive media coverage  Honesty boxes at parking points – have worked well; cannot get permission to put in ‘pay and display’ booths.  Friends of the Reeks scheme means ‘friends’ pay annual voluntary sum.  Indemnity Scheme to be sought through State Claims Agency  Upland Path Audit (22km) completed, with a remedial plan, indicative

1

If this is estimated conservatively at €25/ head per visitor, this means the Reeks directly bring €1,875,000 into the regional tourism spend annually. 6|P a g e






costings of €572,000 + VAT. The Forum considers this to be reasonable sum given the amenity, landscape and tourism value of the Reeks to Killarney and South Kerry region. Detailed specifications have been drawn up to meet best international practice in construction and planning for the Devil’s Ladder, Hag’s Glen, O’Shea’s Gully and Caher access routes to Carrauntoohil. These areas suffer from severe path migration and erosion locally. Application to the REDZ scheme was successful to deliver training to address some of the Upland Path repair work. These skills are not available in Ireland yet, so have brought in expertise to train local landowners in the correct techniques. A training programme in path and erosion management, costing €143,000 commenced in November 2015 in foul weather, with 8 participants (and thousands of hours).

Learnings: Local issues can be solved locally ‘Business as usual’ is not an option – upland areas need to be managed in partnership Perceptions that mountains are ‘free assets’ needs to be overcome through education and awareness raising. Costs are ongoing and remedial works should be rolling onwards.

Stewart quoted Aldo Leopold of the Wilderness Society who said in 1938 that: “It’s not about land – It always comes down to personal relationships and getting people to work together. Conservation will ultimately boil down to rewarding the private landowner who conserves the public interest “

Farming the Uplands: How viable is upland farming? We may be seeing the last generation on the hills. The value of uplands may need to be acknowledged in a different way – in terms of environmental, social and recreational services, versus purely in agrieconomic terms. Should payments be made for the eco-amenity aspects of land management versus farm outputs? As it stands, the main beneficiaries of the Reeks is Killarney versus the people who own and manage the mountains. Who pays for heather, bracken (ferns) and gorse control? Fire access? Despite the Walks Scheme, this is limited to managed trails – why is there no value on the Uplands?? How will upland communities survive? Agriculture and tourism are presented as ‘salvé’ but in reality, very little comes back into the pockets of rural dwellers in South Kerry. An Agri-Environment Scheme is under application for the Reeks, but this is a long haul and requires significant inputs. The programme for Government 2016 contained a lot of murmurings about ‘rural’ but there appears to be very little coherent policy development. Stewart reflected on the comments of a retired Secretary General of the Department of Finance who suggested that “it is unsustainable to subsidise personal choices to live in the country” – such is the support at the highest echelons of the public sector for rural development. We need a radical change of mindset, leadership and coherent policy to deliver meaningful and sustained rural development measures for upland communities.

7|P a g e


The Mourne Heritage Trust: 20 Years a-Growing Martin Carey CEO Mourne Heritage Trust

Martin opened by remarking that landscape shapes ways of life. The Mountains of Mourne ‘Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty’ (AONB) encloses both lowlands and mountains, including 20,000ha of mountain and 29,000ha of farmland, mostly small holdings, including Slieve Croob. There was a push about 10 years ago to have the Mournes designated as a National Park, but there was significant resistance to this proposal; thus it has remained as an AONB. Management issues include litter, erosion, dumping, cars/ parking. The MHT has adopted a ‘doing and facilitative’ approach versus stand-off management. They rely heavily on local community ‘eyes and ears’ as advisory as issues arise. Solving issues is central to the work via erosion control, signage etc. In the early days, the focus was on heritage features to support tourism, such as vernacular homes (‘Mourne Homesteads’). Projects attracted £2.4 million, funding 72 projects, which elevated standards to meet tourist expectations. The Mournes Signature Action Plan (2008-2014) set in place key objectives and actions, which assisted with funding applications - and actually won an EU award. Healthy Environment = Healthy People initiative focused on the fact that environmental activity is a preventative and acts to build social inclusion. Work is guided by the AONB Management Plan 2010-2020 (a non-statutory document, thus does not receive a committed budget). The Paths Network Management Plan o delivered via helicopters, appropriate use of machinery such as backhoe etc. o Moved to avoiding stone pitching now, working instead with compacted mineral soils. o Labour is supplied by a mix of contractors, volunteers and staff. o Coir rolls are used to create dams; natural materials to control water flow. The MHT is working with landowners in the lowlands to gain permissive access. Ranger service is in place. Signage is used to keep people on-track Land management measures, such as controlled burning in key sites to remove fuel load (following major fire) Funding? MHT is a major employer – maintains 20 full time jobs in a rural area Lottery funding £1.2 million // cross border GeoPark supports AONB very valuable designation to attract government resources, with weight in planning issues Community Relations It can be difficult to be both the community friend and ‘big brother’ regulator. The community structure does not necessarily bring community buy-in. Mourne Heritage Trust - Reflections on 20 years in existence: Role as service provider has been solidified and recognised by Councils Inconsistent policy is hard to work with Practical conservation work has been achieved Community engagement work is highly time consuming – needs to be 8|P a g e


more targeted Learned through Trial and error– we know what we are good at now! The proposal for a National Park model did not work in the Mournes due to a poor consultative process and frequent misinformation. It was based on the UK model with different attitudes and land ownership patterns. The ROI public lands model of park may provide a better model. Better to work together to influence policy and government – in fact, we need to work together to influence policy on an all-island level.

Upland Community Participants at the IUF Conference

MacGillycuddy Reeks Mountain Field Trip Led by members of the Reeks Mountain Forum

MacGillycuddy Reeks Mountain Field Trip The conference attendees were lucky with a stunning day when they visited the work being undertaken by the MacGillycuddy Reeks Mountain Access Forum. The Reeks, as mentioned by Stewart Stephens in his morning talk, had a professional Path Audit completed on the key access routes to Ireland’s highest mountain, Carrauntoohil, in the heart of the Reeks. First stop was to discuss biodiversity and agriculture in the MacGillycuddy Reeks. Eoin Kelleher, Environmental Planner with Kerry County Council, and KCC representative on the Forum, gave a riveting account of the biota and habitats of the Reeks. He showed the habitat of the Kerry Slug, a local listed species which appears to be flourishing and has expanded its habitat.

Mike O’Sullivan (landowner) left, and Eoin Kelleher (KCC) right, speaking to the field trip delegates

Mike O’Sullivan, co-owner of the Breanlea commonage to the west, and member of the Forum, gave an excellent presentation on the seasonality and challenges of upland farming, information on successful sheep breeds in the Reeks, and the general decline in the economics of upland farming. Mike is a great advocate of the Reeks Forum and feels that it gives much more traction when dealing with agricultural authorities and is optimistic that the Forum model will deliver benefits for the farming communities of the Reeks. Participants walked along the access path to the Hag’s Glen from the carpark at Lisleibane.

9|P a g e


Jimmy O’Shea, another co-owner of the Breanlea commonage, was working with a number of colleagues as we walked along, hand-working the drainage ditches on either side of the road to allow water to drain off the track.

Trisha Deane, RRO, demonstrates the Path Restoration works in lower reaches of the Hags Glen note: Carrauntoohil peak in far distance

Trisha Deane, Rural Recreation Officer for South Kerry, and coordinator of the Reeks Forum, gave us a short talk on the path towards Cronins’ Yard on the training programme that was delivered from November 2015 into early 2016, possibly the wettest months seen in Ireland since records began! Eight participants received training over a 4 month period and the fruits of their labour can be seen. Critical is water management in areas of high rainfall such as South Kerry, and applying the correct surfacing and stone pitching to withstand even the worst storms. The path restoration work is excellent, with drainage channels and stone pitching completed that will last for generations. The workers on this project have gained valuable path restoration and management skills that are not readily available in Ireland and are willing to share their skills with other groups. This will ultimately build a cohort of path restoration skills in Ireland that will rank with the best in these islands.

John Cronin and his family greeted the visitors with welcome tea and fruit cake in what must be the most successful blend of family tourism with recreational access in the country at Cronins’ Yard. The family owns lands in commonage on the Reeks and for (at least) five generations allowed access to Carrauntoohil. Vehicles may park for a small fee in their farmyard operated on an ‘honesty box’ system. In recent years, the Cronins have expanded their offering to a teashop, showers & loos and camping pods - all done with the utmost taste and natural hospitality. John’s mother Eileen still lives at Cronins’ Yard and keeps a watchful eye on the passers-by, all of whom are treated like long lost friends. The field trip was arranged by John O’Sullivan on behalf of IUF. John is a member of the Kerry Mountain Rescue and his family have land in the Hags Glen. Many thanks John for seamless logistics – you got us all back in time for dinner! It must be noted that Trisha as Coordinator, and Mike, Jimmy, John C. and John O’S and all the other landowners on the Reeks have put inordinate time into getting the Reeks Forum off the ground and are to be congratulated for their vision and commitment.

Speed Dating and Conference Dinner Kate Kearney’s Cottage, Gap of Dunloe

A very enjoyable speed networking session was organised to allow IUF Conference attendees to meet and get to know each other in a timed, ‘musical chairs’ type of session. This provided an opportunity to learn more about individuals and groups and to exchange contacts details. A wonderful dinner was enjoyed in Kate Kearney’s Cottage by delegates to the magical tunes of Sliabh Luachra in northeast Kerry. A number of our own singers and dancers also joined in the music !

10 | P a g e


Conference delegates on the Lisleibane track, leading to the Hag’s Glen in the MacGillycuddy Reeks– Mike O’Sullivan (right, foreground) outlined the challenges in hill-farming on the Reeks and talked about the considerable progress of the Reeks Mountain Access Forum

11 | P a g e


DAY 2

FRIDAY 27 MAY 2016

Dr. Patrick Casement

Effective Community Networking: Northern Ireland Environment Link

Chair of Northern Ireland Environment Link (NIEL)

Northern Ireland Environment Link, or NIEL, is an example of an effective community-based network, but Patrick reflected initially on the need for such a network – why establish it? The environment is not a priority for the NI Government and Northern Ireland has a fragmentary array of small groups, many of which are overly dependent on public funding, voluntary fundraising and project-driven non-core funding, or some combination of the above. Currently, there are 75 NGOs (non-governmental organisations) and 45 associations in NIEL, covering an array of natural, built, landscape and wildlife organisational interests. NIEL has 12 staff with a focus on policy development, providing inputs to Government as a united front, representing the broad interests of membership. Issues such as climate action, marine and freshwater habitats, transport, land management, planning and resource efficiency are some of the policy areas that NIEL is concerned with. A key issue is the recent transformation of local government in Northern Ireland with consequent changes in funding models. The benefits of the network are that NIEL provides a Secretariat, acting as an umbrella for, and in collaboration with, a diverse array of local strategic alliances (Climate NI; Open Government Network; NI Archaeology Forum; Belfast Food Network) among others). NIEL provides leadership across these diverse groupings e.g. in National Ecosystem Assessment – they find innate resistance at official level to issues such as ‘ecosystems services’ but a united front is more effective in influencing policy. Funding: NIEL realised in 2014 that they had an over-reliance on government funding which can be cut on a whim. There have been ‘savage cuts’ in the NI budgets for support of the NGO sector since 2014, creating a funding crisis. NIEL provided vital sector leadership in response to this situation. They have found the HLF Catalyst useful in financing training in sourcing funding. Lobbying of the new Dept. Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs means they have secured a 3-year funding package. It was very hard to get commitment to ‘Environment Week’, but NIEL brought NI Members of the Legislative Assembly (MLAs) to Scotland recently and got excellent buy-in. This helps to position NIEL as the ‘go to’ agency for environmental advice for policy development. Ahead of Election 2016, NIEL consulted with members to develop a sectoral manifesto for the new government ‘Priorities for the Environment 2016-2021’. Conclusions: Connect NGOs with Government and to other Sectors A Network such as NIEL provides a single point of contact for the Environment for politicians The power of the combined groups as a Network can be formidable!

12 | P a g e


Networking the Heritage Towns of Ireland Liam Mannix Irish Walled Towns Network (Heritage Council of Ireland)

The Irish Walled Towns Network (IWTN) was established in 2005 to advance the conservation and promotion of walled towns. Work has focused on the public realm and the development of conservation plans. The funding cuts in the 2011-13 period hit the network desperately, but it is still functioning. The network comprises 29 walled towns on an all-island basis. The structure is open, fully transparent in all aspects of funding and spending; and engages in significant consultation (39 events over 5 years) to build ownership and trust. The Heritage Council provides administrative and policy support, through network coordination. Irish Walled Town Festivals in 2015 attracted 48,000 people, proving €1.2 million spend to the towns, with average expenditure of €25/ head. This demonstrates the value of innovative promotion of a unique heritage. Current ideas in listening to the discussions on Uplands….how best to communicate the importance of upland heritage to broaden public support? Perhaps develop Heritage Interpretation Plans with a focus on natural heritage of Uplands; use ‘pop-up’ tents to promote and provide education to the public? There has been a move towards Heritage Led Town Planning, which provides more integrated approach, public consultation and local ownership of plans. Having ‘potential’ is useless unless have a good plan to execute it – a good example is Tayto Park – “a field in Co. Meath” attracted 670,000 people in 2015, because the entrepreneur had a plan, a vision and used the natural potential. Recommendations to build a successful Network: First Plan – Then Act! Be positive and focus on what you have, vs what you do not have. Experience of the WTN suggests that partnership is critical among all parties (public and private). Do good research and reflect honestly. Consult – do not insult! Have a core vision but set realistic goals and related actions. Focus on what you can do (not what you cannot, or what the competition is doing). BUT, there is no ‘free lunch’ – it is a long slog to build a network, but is very satisfying when it eventually works. Develop quick wins that will bring people along and build ownership. The sum of the parts is greater than the whole. Finally, while the sceptics may disregard awards, they are very useful to win funding and keep off the doomsayers! Potential Funding Sources to support Networks: LEADER/ RDP 2014-2020, with tri-partite focus on Innovation, Climate Change and Environment, respectively. Inter-Regional / Cross Border Local Authority – Agenda 21 funding Comhairle na Tuaithe – mountain access scheme roll-out Agri-environment schemes – locally led Fáilte Ireland Social Finance EU InterReg/ EU LIFE/ Horizon 2020 (research/ R&D)

13 | P a g e


27 May 2016

WORKSHOP REPORTS

WORKSHOP A Accessing Resources for Upland Groups

Facilitator: Siobhan Geoghegan, Community Development Consultant Rapporteur: Helena Fitzgerald, IUF 19 attended the first workshop, 11 attended the second. Participants introduced themselves at the start of each workshop. Both groups contained a broad range of interests with high levels of participation in the discussion. The workshop was structured to examine needs, skills, and resources relevant to upland community groups.

SKILLS GAP

NEEDS  FUNDING, Core and Project  A HUMAN RESOURCE, employed to help drive the project  Clearly defined OBJECTIVES and a STRATEGIC PLAN. This should be modular, with each activity contributing to group objectives (helps to make the most of limited resources)  EARLY STAGES very important. Need a ROADMAP, someone to help, an information resource to ensure the best structure for the group. Could this be an independent facilitator/IUF Coordinator?  KNOWLEDGE of Assets – People and Place  KNOWLEDGE of Strategic Plans of potential funding bodies like LEADER, Local Authorities  Help in HOW TO FUNCTION AS A GROUP  A CENTRAL IUF RESOURCE for information provision, case studies, a road map for the early stages  A COORDINATED APPROACH between Local Authorities and LEADER Companies. Mountains cross boundaries  ACCESS TO KNOWLEDGE, POLICY & DECISION MAKERS SKILLS – Groups need people who……  Can see the BIG PICTURE  Are PRACTICAL  Have CLARITY OF PURPOSE  Have strong ORGANISATION and ADMINISTRATION skills  Have FINANCIAL and GOVERNANCE skills (critical skillset - this can fall behind)  Can COMMUNICATE the VALUE of HILL FARMING and of our MOUNTAINS  Are good at NETWORKING – with COMMUNITY (consultation), with INSTITUTIONS and with STATE BODIES.  Have TENACITY, VISION, PASSION  Are good at FUNDRAISING  Can foster a CULTURE OF OPENNESS. ‘If hill farming isn’t working we need to try new things’  Can LISTEN and UNITE  Think POSITIVE HOW TO OBTAIN THE SKILL SETS NEEDED  Look within your community – Ask for help  Volunteers from http://www.volunteer.ie  Buy in FEASIBILITY SUPPORT or an ANIMATOR STAGES OF GROUP FORMATION 1 All voluntary at the start; take your time; talk to each other; get to know people; listen carefully 14 | P a g e


2

3

Draw up a Rough Plan in ‘Plain English’ of what the group want to do Facilitator or other skilled input needed to fine-tune the Rough Plan, to structure and clarify group objectives. Many groups get stuck at this stage as they ‘lack confidence and capacity’. ‘A huge amount of support is needed’ as it is difficult to overcome the ‘stigma of disadvantage’. Apply for funding to develop specific projects using ‘jargon’ and ‘system knowledge’

OTHER OBSERVATIONS ‘Lack of knowledge and clarity’ about the Public Participation Network (PPN), Local Community Development Committees (LCDCs) LEADER/ RDP  LEADER Programme 2014 - 2020 to be signed off in 4-5 weeks  €250 Million Funding available  Separate fund of €10million for Cooperation Projects where two or more LAGs work together. (Inter-county or Cross-Border). Could the IUF apply directly for this for funds to support the Network?  To be rolled out with different timescales and priorities by each LEADER Company / Local Action Group (LAG)  Each LEADER Company has a Local Development Strategy – Groups need to be familiar with this  Develop a good working relationship with LEADER Company/Companies  Groups should SUBMIT EXPRESSIONS OF INTEREST for planned projects  Specific Theme for RURAL ENVIRONMENT. This presents a particular OPPORTUNITY for Upland Groups.  Sub Themes for funding are  Protection and sustainable use of WATER resources  Protection and improvement of LOCAL BIODIVERSITY  Development of RENEWABLE ENERGY o Budgets have been allocated by the LAG under each of these themes  Cross Cutting Objectives of LEADER Programme  Innovation  Climate Change  Environment  Types of funding available through LEADER  Analysis And Development (A&D) – funded at 75%* Feasibility Studies, Development Plans, Strategic Plans, Mapping Exercises  Training - funded at 100%*  Capital works funded at 50%* * Percentage to be confirmed by each LAG  ‘Benefit in Kind’ may be used in lieu of match funding LOCAL FUNDRAISING  Requires considerable energy – often distracting from core aims  Training needed?  Approach Interest Groups – Hill Walkers?  Generate income e.g. Reeks Honesty Box, Friend of the Reeks, Sliabh Sneacht building OTHER FUNDING SOURCES  Agenda 21  Heritage Council Community Grant Scheme 15 | P a g e


      

Comhairle na Tuaithe –Walks Scheme, Mountain Access Scheme Pilots Locally Led Agri-Environment Schemes (DAFM) Fáilte Ireland – Funding to become available for ‘Storytelling, Heritage and Interpretation Projects’ for project values up to €200k Philanthropy Social Finance The Wheel - http://www.wheel.ie lists other funding sources EU Funding – ‘under utilised in Ireland’, ‘difficult to access’  LIFE (Open for applications)  InterReg (Open for applications)  Horizon 2020 (Research) The profile of an InterREG project was described by the Irish Red Grouse Association - Lead Partner (with financial track record in excess of 6 years) + Irish Academic Partner + Other NGO and Academic Project Partners in the EU + Irish State Bodies e.g. NPWS, Coillte.

It was felt that EU project structures were very complex with onerous reporting requirements and ‘beyond the reach’ of community groups without financial resources and the necessary skillsets. It was suggested that an Irish Uplands Forum Resource could have a role in identifying research needs within upland communities and helping to identify suitable European projects and networks.

ACADEMIC INSTITUTIONS, STATE BODIES & NGOs

IRISH UPLANDS FORUM

UPLAND COMMUNITY GROUPS

How to Secure more EU Funding

CONCLUSIONS Irish Upland Community Groups need the following resources:  Consistent CORE FUNDING to support their operations at local level; to develop their plans and to prevent ‘burn out’ of committed individuals  Access to the SKILLS needed to secure funding and to develop and implement their plans  An EFFECTIVE NETWORK of upland community groups TRANSFERRING KNOWLEDGE between groups and supported by a HUMAN RESOURCE (skilled) and INFORMATION BANK at the Irish Uplands Forum CONNECTING upland communities to Academia, Policymakers, Government & State Bodies, Other Networks and Interest Groups both on the Island of Ireland and within the EU

16 | P a g e


WORKSHOP B Implementing the Mountain Access Project in the MacGillycuddy Reeks, Co Kerry

Facilitator: Patricia Deane, Rural Recreation Officer, Kerry Rapporteur: Helen Lawless, Access & Conservation, Mountaineering Ireland _________________________________________________________________ 11 people contributed to the first workshop and 7 to the second; key points from each workshop, based on Patricia’s input and groups’ responses are summarised below: Key learnings from the experience of the MacGillycuddy Reeks Mountain Forum •

•

• • • •

The national ‘Mountain Access Project’ is based on managing recreation with the voluntary agreement of landowners; noted that permissive access needs to be managed; The MacGillycuddy Reeks Mountain Access Project is the larger of two pilots : and has been successfully initiated with excellent buy-in across the various stakeholders (landowners (individual and commonage); local and statutory authorities; South Kerry Development Partnership; recreational users; enterprise – SMEs, B&Bs, guides - and broader tourism interests); A strong Chairperson is key – who must be a good facilitator; Consider / Consult / Communicate – open and transparent communications are essential; Managing expectations of all is critical in sustaining buy-in for the longer and medium term; and Adopt a collaborative Action Plan with defined ‘quick wins’ so that people can see the benefits of participation in the Forum

Based on the Reeks Forum experience, it is clear: • • • • •

• •

Issues can be addressed locally, but with key levels of support; Path repair must be implemented using best practice to minimise landscape impact, and deal with high numbers and high levels of rainfall; Agri-environment schemes are requisite to support upland farmers, and to sustain traditional management practices; Sustained resources are absolutely essential; Core funding (staff & ongoing costs) is required • so far relying on key inputs of Rural Recreation Officer/ South Kerry Development Partnership, but this is unsustainable in the long term due to other demands on RRO time and rural development budgets; A draft toolkit has been developed by Comhairle na Tuaithe’s Mountain Access Steering Group to support extension of the project to other areas. Implementation of the Mountain Access Project model doesn’t necessarily require establishing a new group or working on the scale of the Reeks Forum, the scale of the Reeks project reflects the issues present in this area.

Happy 2nd Birthday to the Reeks Forum!

17 | P a g e


WORKSHOP C Agri-Environment: Opportunities for Uplands Farmers?

Facilitator: Dr. James Moran, Sligo IT and Jerome Walsh, Dept. Agriculture, Forestry & Marine Rapporteur: Brian Dunne, Wicklow Upland Council Dr James Moran began the workshop by giving a brief presentation on Locally Led Agri-Environment Schemes (LLAES), outlining the background and need for such schemes across the country  Following the success of the Burren LIFE Programme it was realised the potential success of expanding agri-environment schemes in other areas to tackle a range of issues.  High Nature Value Farming (HNV) – Low intensity farming in marginal areas  50% of HNV in Ireland is in uplands areas, greater % in some areas  Need for a locally led approach to address local issues. A ‘one size fits all’ approach cannot be as successful as schemes tailored to specific areas and specific issues.  Issues in uplands area include;  Land abandonment  Declining biodiversity due to poor habitats  The reduction of valuable ecosystem services  The need to address the decline in upland farming and support farmers (through remuneration for services provided)  Age profile of farmers 

Need for strong local partnership group  ‘Local people can solve local problems’



Following the review of Rural Development Programme (RDP) there is now provision for the rollout of LLAES in other areas. This is a huge initiative by the Dept. as only 2 other member states out of 126 RDPs have a made provision for schemes similar to the proposed LLAES. Rollout of a scheme for the Burren, Hen Harrier and the Freshwater Pearl Mussel will take priority followed by an open competitive call for uplands schemes to be linked with other issues e.g. water quality.  Questions were raised as to why two specific species were given priority over a more widespread scheme that would benefit the entire habitat and a range of species;  Indicator species indicative of healthy habitats.

 

LLAESs were a main topic of conversation over the course of the conference  Time to invest in upland farming systems or abandon;  Clear that hill farmers need some kind of other support on top of current GLAS payments. LLAESs payments would have obvious benefits to farmers and keep them in a hill farming system;  LLAES will complement current GLAS scheme but cannot pay for the same measures;  Results of scheme will be backed by scientific research, need to deliver innovative results and demonstrate that areas are effectively managed;  Farmers possess the knowledge to effectively maintain uplands region in good environmental condition through grazing and vegetation management – who else would carry out a similar role;  Upland catchment areas – people will eventually be paying for water, so why not pay farmer to protect catchment and improve water quality (bracken control/phytochemicals)? Similar schemes in place in South West England;  Questions raised about areas with no Natura designation and also about smallholder farmers who are ineligible for the process, but need support; 18 | P a g e




Agri-environment schemes are of fundamental importance but are just one tool for long term sustainable communities.

Concerns over funding allocation  €70M allocated for LLAES including the Burren, Hen Harrier and Freshwater Pearl Mussel Schemes. Concerns arose re. funding left for uplands scheme;  Need to advocate that the funding is allocated strategically;  Rough estimate that €15M will remain to be allocated following the rollout of previous schemes >> Enough money to support flagship upland schemes. A lot of groups are focusing on LLAESs hoping to secure the scheme for their area  The question was put to the workshops if they thought that; a) there should be widespread rollout of the scheme across the country with limited funding and resources for a wider number of areas? or b) there should be 2-3 areas selected to pilot the scheme with adequate financing and resources who would act as a flagship for the rollout of further schemes in the future? Consensus that b) would be the best option as the success of the initial schemes will determine if the schemes will be continued and rolled-out nationally. Areas should be provided with as much support as possible, from IUF and other groups, to ensure they are successful;  Advised that the success of the scheme will be monitored very closely with the upcoming CAP mid-term review in 2018. Therefore it is essential that the scheme will deliver the results promised. Need to educate the public on the services that the uplands are providing  Little knowledge of ecosystem services provided by the uplands, need a marketing campaign to demonstrate services the uplands are providing and also how farming practice supports these;  Poor public perception of farmers and payment schemes;  Wider public are the beneficiaries of goods and services provided by uplands (water, tourism, food etc.);  Terminology needs to change, farmers need to be ‘remunerated’ and paid for services provided not ‘compensated’. Application Process  Jerome explained applications for the uplands scheme will be accepted from groups or partnerships and not individuals;  The application process will be a two stage process. The first call for applications will be a simplified process, involving outlining the plans for the group to implement the scheme. These applications will be reviewed and successful applicants will then be invited to submit further more in depth details for a second round of applications;  The purpose of the two stage process is two save groups investing a lot of time and money into preparing an extensive application if they don’t make it past the 1st round;  This will be an open call – no centralised support;  Accessing funding and resources for application process, can be daunting:  The need for expertise of groups such as IUF in providing support. Question what is the view for the LLAES as an Uplands Forum?  To keep a National conversation going about the necessity for the scheme, to provide expertise where possible, to strive for success in the implementation of the LLAES, and to monitor CAP reforms closely and lobby for the widespread implementation of a LLAES. 19 | P a g e


WORKSHOP D Building a Network of Upland Community Based Groups

Facilitator: Michael Starrett, CEO Heritage Council & Alan Hill, Rural Development Consultant and Author of Upland Communities Study 2016 Rapporteur: Deirdre Lewis, SLR - Rural Recreation & Development Consultant _____________________________________________________________________ The workshop focused on the practicalities of building a national network of upland community groups, but first asked (why?); how the physical networking might be managed (how? And by whom?) and where it might be based (where?). Critically, the issue of how the network will be resourced (how much? Funding?) were addressed. Why Establish an Upland Network?  “To develop a shared approach to custodianship of the Uplands, through sustainable landscape management in respectful and inclusive partnerships”.  Seek to establish a clear and legitimate single voice for the Uplands - up to 95% of participants in Workshop D agreed;  Recognise that we need an overall Vision for the uplands; we are operating in a policy vacuum (island wide). We need ‘bottom-up’ policy development, in recognition of inter-dependencies of agriculture, socio-economic sustainability and recreational access and enterprise. Key issues for a representative network: clear policy, shared mandate and vision; and all-island inclusiveness. To achieve this we will need the weight of numbers as a ‘community of interest’ with defined ‘champions’. A cautionary note was sounded: we as a community of interest must be well prepared, with clear plans based on evidence based research to support our cause. It will require commitment, leadership and bravery to achieve the collective vision and realise the benefits – a collective approach vs sectoral interests will achieve better outcomes for all, especially farmers. We must manage expectations also - it will be a ‘hard slog’. Current upland groups across the island of Ireland, based on recent research (Hill, IUF 2016), are small and frequently isolated, but are suffering burn-out. The supporting management structures and succession planning need to be addressed.

Comment from an Upland community activist

We must build a shared VISION, to be inclusive to achieve defined objectives; we must add value through connections, sharing and education. “Plug us into each other and we’ll light up Rural Ireland”! Who should lead this initiative? Some discussion ensued on options:  Comhairle na Tuaithe? - key partner but not leader.  Embed in existing organisation, such as Heritage Council? - key partner, with  Irish Uplands Forum? - logical leader  Rural Link or Irish Rural Network (IRLink + NUIG) or NI Rural Network or NI Environment Network (NIEL) that already have core structures /network?  Government Department? - No, would not lead as the members wish  RDP Leader Company – provide secretariat? Not favoured – need more focus  Agency? - key partners  New Company limited by guarantee? - no, not desired by membership >> preferred option is through the Irish Uplands Forum in association with the Heritage Council.

20 | P a g e


How: Actions, Strategy, Policy?  Coordinator will be required  Define clear charter: what, why, when, how much?  Establish principles: inclusive-partnership-synergy-transparency-learning RESPECT  Strategic Action Plan: phased, deliverable, costed  Agree the future Governance structure and mechanisms to deliver  Ensure landowners do not see this as imposition – work in partnership  Deliver on all–island basis – partnership and spirit of cooperation/ synergies,  Identify potential sources of funding (see Workshop A above & below) - seek funding for groups – transparency and focus  In tandem: Lobby on new national strategy for Uplands through the new Rural Affairs Department; work via Comhairle na Tuaithe Potential Funding Resource? Make case for public funding on all-island basis  Core funding from central department (Rural Development section in new Gov. Department?) to provide sustained funds and supports  Statutory agency – Heritage Council? Core funding for 3 years/ 10 groups?  RDP 2014-2020 – may provide supports for individual groups potentially, based on strong plans and capacity to deliver (get organised fast!)  Scaled membership fee (by organisational size) to belong to Network  EU funding (InterReg : ROI - NI) ?? - post Brexit may not be feasible  REDZ funding or equivalent  Research must underpin the Strategic effort  Recommend: Irish Uplands Forum to lead, with governance and core support from Heritage Council and new Department of Rural Affairs

The Rapporteurs presented the key points from each workshop for consideration by the plenary Irish Uplands Forum ‘Resourcing the Uplands’ 2016 Conference, to be taken forward as recommendations for implementation.

21 | P a g e


PLENARY DISCUSSION

KEY LEARNINGS FROM WORKSHOPS Organisational Develop shared vision and core principles across island of Ireland Strategic Action Plan: phased, deliverable, costed Strong chairperson is critical Multi-stakeholders must be involved: Consider- Consult – Connect Manage expectations of landowners, communities and stakeholders Lobby for national Strategy for Management of the Uplands; Develop local solutions within national policy framework; Physical Requirements Path repairs nationally – urgent to implement to highest standards Learn from Reeks and build national network of skilled path workers Agri-environmental focus: high nature value farming schemes for the uplands could be supported under new RDP Resources Core funding for human and project resources National Indemnity Scheme Research and secure RDP/ Agri options Core funding required from Dept. Rural Affairs IUF direction with governance under the Heritage Council Draft Toolkit for Steering Groups to support other ‘pilot’ areas  Recommend the IUF provide a national umbrella to support a Network of Irish Upland Communities, with Heritage Council support  Upland communities to develop a focused Flagship Model and secure funding through the revised CAP/ RDP funding models  ‘Hitch our wagon’ to a broader rural movement to get the attention of politicians and strategic policy developments.

Michael Starrett CEO Heritage Council of Ireland

Michael provided a very strong endorsement to the work of the Conference and made a strong commitment to assist where possible in the establishment of an all-island network of Community-led Upland groups. Michael suggested that: Coordinator for a National Upland Communities Network should be appointed. The Heritage Council would be willing provide over-arching governance, while the IUF could physically direct the activity of the Coordinator. A sustained multi-annual budget would be required to support the network. This would effectively support upland communities to do their local work, but through a national network, with integrated policy, shared learnings and good governance.

22 | P a g e


FINAL MANDATE & ENDORSEMENT OF THE DELEGATES

The conference endorsed the proposal to establish a National Network of Upland Community groups under the umbrella of the Irish Uplands Forum. The delegates at the closing session of the Resourcing Upland Communities conference at Beaufort in May 2016: Endorsed the findings and recommendations of the two evidencebased research reports, as presented at the conference; Mandated the IUF to go to government (Minister of Rural Affairs) to seek support for the establishment of a National Network of Upland Community groups, prepared to manage the recreational, environmental and socio-economic development of their defined upland area resource; Mandated the IUF to seek multi annual funding for a Co-Ordinator of the National Network of Upland Community groups, to integrate our efforts. A Strategy and Action Plan (2016-2020), to include the Irish Upland’s Forum’s work programme for the five-year period, will be developed based on the evidence-based research and the mandate of the IUF membership and conference delegates.

23 | P a g e


SCHOOLS ART COMPETITION

PAINTINGS & PRIZE GIVINGS! As part of the IUF’s ‘Resourcing Communities’ 2016 conference in Dungloe, it was not forgotten that the future of Ireland’s uplands lies with young people, many of whom display a fierce appreciation of their home environments. The IUF invited all schools in the foothills of the MacGillycuddy Reeks to participate in an art competition on the theme of upland communities and what they mean….with highly imaginative and creative inputs from all!

A creative depiction of the MacGillycuddy Reeks, with colourful walkers approaching the peaks and Carrauntoohil by a young local artist

The story of the Kerry Mountain Rescue Team by Orlaith Kelly of Cullina National School

24 | P a g e


I Love the Mountains By Leah Callan

Poetry Corner By Cullina National School students

25 | P a g e


The Prizegivings

Well done to all our student participants for their efforts and hearty congratulations to the worthy winners!

Ms. Moira Cronin (centre back), Principal of Cullina National School, receiving a winning cheque from Pat Dawson Manager (back, right), Manager of Killarney National Park, surrounded by the young artists. Also, Stewart Stephens (back left), Chair of the Reeks’ Mountain Forum, and Frank Nugent (left of Ms Cronin), Chairperson of the Irish Uplands Forum.

Ms. Bernie Costello (centre, back), Principal of Kilgobnet National School, receives a prize cheque from Frank Nugent, Chairperson of IUF, surrounded by the artistic students. Also, Pat Dawson Manager (back, right), Manager of Killarney National Park and Stewart Stephens (back, left), Chair of the Reeks’ Mountain Forum.

26 | P a g e


Acknowledgements From the IUF

The organising committee for the 2016 Conference of the Irish Uplands Forum in Beaufort would like to thank the many individuals who contributed to the success of the event. First and foremost, we would like to thank Dr. Mary Tubridy, IUF Secretary, who planned the early conference programme, commissioned research, coordinated many logistical arrangements and for her continued vision for the Irish Uplands – a speedy recovery Mary, from all your friends. To the researchers who are providing critical evidence-based research to support the vision for sustainable upland communities, thank you. To all the speakers for their stimulating contributions; the workshop coordinators for encouraging us all to think hard about how best to organise and all the participants for their diligence and critical enquiries. The landowners and members of the MacGillycuddy Reeks Mountain Forum are providing practical models for other upland communities, who are starting this process, to emulate. Thanks to Trisha, Mike, Jimmy, John and all the others for your time and guidance on the field trip. Thanks to John and Marie O’Sullivan for registration and the excellent logistical arrangements, which meant the conference flowed seamlessly and added to the delegates’ enjoyment. Thanks to the management and staff at the Dunloe Hotel for their hospitality and magical surroundings and to Kate Kearney’s Cottage for wonderful dinner and entertainment. A final thank you to our many volunteers and our Sponsors, without whom the conference could not have happened. Finally, thanks to all those community participants who travelled the long miles to participate in the IUF Conference 2016 - we are sure you will have met many kindred spirits and found the journey worthwhile!

27 | P a g e


MacGillycuddy Reeks , Co Kerry Carrauntoohil, Ireland’s highest mountain, under partial cloud

28 | P a g e


s

“We shall never achieve harmony with the land, any more than we shall achieve justice or liberty for all people. In these higher aspirations, the important thing is not to achieve, but to strive.” Aldo Leopold, Wilderness Society, 1938

29 | P a g e