EU ruling on Birds Directive 'direct threat' to farming - Fitzmaurice
A TD has claimed that a recent ruling from the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) on the EU Birds Directive is a "direct threat to Irish farming".
Michael Fitzmaurice, Independent Ireland TD for Roscommon-Galway, claimed that the ruling is a "an assault of food production".
Fitzmaurice said that the strict interpretation of the directive will leave farmers and foresters unable to carry out routine activities that may disturb bird populations, including ploughing and tree felling and thinning.
He said that the move from the court represents "a serious and dangerous escalation" in regulatory overreach that could undermine everyday farming and forestry activity.
"The judgement raises a fundamental and deeply troubling question for Irish farmers," he said.
"Are we now be told that we cannot plough our own land to grow food because it might impact bird populations?
"If that is the direction this ruling is taking us, then it is lunacy of the highest order. Ploughing land, reseeding grass, and managing farms are not optional activities. They are the basis of food production," the TD said.
The ruling from the court, which involved a case originally taken in Estonia, says that the application of the prohibitions laid down in the Birds Directive should be applied even where the purpose of the human activity concerned is different from the capture or killing of birds or the destruction of, or damage to, their nests and eggs.
It also states that, for forestry, the clear-felling or partial felling of trees during bird nesting and breeding season, where birds with unfavourable conservation status could be impacted, should fall under the restrictions in the directive.
According to Fitzmaurice, the ruling significantly expands the scope of activities that may require prior assessment or restriction under the Birds Directive, and risks placing normal farming practices into the same legal category as large-scale developments.
"This judgement epitomises EU overreach. It reflects a mindset where European courts feel entitled to interfere in the most basic, long-established activities carried out by farmers who already operate under strict environmental rules," he said.
Fitzmaurice added: "Applied to forestry, the implications become even more farcical. Routine and responsible forest management — thinning, felling, replanting — risks being recast as a legal minefield rather than a necessary part of sustainable land use."
He said that forest owners and contractors will be put in the position of not knowing if managing their land "now requires a solicitor on site".
"If common sense continues to be replaced by abstract interpretation, forestry risks being regulated into paralysis, where trees are easier left unmanaged than responsibly cared for."
The TD said that Irish farmers are being "steadily squeezed" between climate policy, environmental policy and legal uncertainty.
He claimed that the CJEU is "increasingly acting as a driver of climate and environmental absolutism, with little regard for food security, rural livelihoods or proportionality".
Fitzmaurice called on the Irish government to urgently clarify the practical implications of the ruling and "resist any attempt to apply it in a way that would paralyse routine farming and forestry activity".
"This country cannot sleepwalk into a situation where farmers are afraid to plough, plant or manage their land," he said.
