State's parks policy is fundamentally flawed, says council

The State's policy of designating national parks in areas such as the Wicklow Mountains has been strongly challenged by the Heritage Council, which says it is "fundamentally flawed". In a major critique of the Wicklow Mountains National Park study, the council - an independent statutory body - says there has been "no critical assessment or adequate justification presented for adopting the current model for national parks as applied in Ireland".

It says a strong case could be made for pursuing a management policy for the Wicklow uplands which corresponded with a "Category V - Protected Landscape" designation, as defined by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature.

The key difference between this and a traditional Stateowned national park "is an acknowledgment that human activities and local communities are not incompatible with the concepts of nature conservation and sustainable development", it says.

"Trying to impose a management regime suited to maintaining truly natural habitats (under the IUCN's Category II - National Parks) on areas where local communities have been farming for centuries may be inappropriate for nature conservation objectives."

Throughout Europe, as the council points out, the "Protected Landscape" designation is widely considered as the most appropriate management category. Germany, for example, has only one national park and more than 400 protected landscapes.

By comparison, the Republic has five national parks - Connemara, Killarney, Glenveagh, Wicklow and the Burren - and no protected landscapes.

It suggests that the establishment of an effective Wicklow Uplands Partnership would be "a concrete step towards bringing protected area management into line with current international thinking", because it would give the community a role in managing the uplands.

Until recently, as a result of weaknesses in the statutory provisions, the council's submission notes that the policy of the National Parks and Wildlife Service was to acquire some of the best wildlife sites and establish them as nature reserves or national parks.

It quotes a 1994 study which concluded that this "strict preservationist approach" had been recognised as being "impossible to implement successfully" as well as being "of doubtful validity on conservation grounds".

Recent developments, particularly the designation of Special Areas of Conservation under the EU Habitats Directive and the introduction of the Rural Environmental Protection Scheme, have "provided an ideal opportunity" to adopt a different approach.

According to the council, the Wicklow Mountains National Park study does not attempt to translate these concepts into a tangible management strategy for the region or to stress the positive benefits of such a strategy to the local communities.

"A move towards a `Category V - Protected Landscape' designation would be an important first step in moving away from this compartmentalised view of nature conservation and would help to address some of the issues raised in the consultation process."

In particular, it would allow traditional activities in the area to continue. Thus, there would be "no justification for a blanket ban on hunting or shooting". The council notes that there are "significant similarities" between the management plans prepared for Wicklow, Killarney and the Burren, despite substantial differences between these areas.

The Heritage Council's views will be warmly welcomed by farmers and landowners in Co Wicklow who have been resisting the current plan, originally proposed by the Office of Public Works. The OPW's plan also included a controversial visitor centre at Luggala.