If I went to my doctor with a cancerous tumour that was treatable and curable, and he shrugged it off and told me to accept it – knowing that without treatment, it would eventually kill me – I’d think he had lost his mind. Yet this is how the Irish State plans to treat some of our most treasured rivers, lakes and estuaries. According to a proposal from the Department of Housing, certain iconic stretches of waters on the likes of the Shannon, Boyne and Blackwater rivers will no longer be viewed as needing restoration. Instead, they will face a future as engineered channels.
In the 1980s and ’90s, Europeans began to recognise that their rivers were in severe decline due to decades of neglect. Naturally meandering waterways were straightened, drained and dammed; chemicals, pesticides and untreated sewage poured into them unchecked. The problem was cross-border: the Danube, which flows through 10 countries, became saturated with pollution. In 1986, a fire at a chemical warehouse near Basle, Switzerland, caused the Rhine river to turn red with mercury and dyes, as vast amounts of toxic waste flowed hundreds of kilometres downstream into Germany and the Netherlands. Drinking water supplies were shut off, and aquatic life, such as European eels, was decimated.
What was clear was that Europe needed a unified, legally binding approach to water protection that set out common rules, clear responsibilities and shared goals. By 2000, a plan was in place that aimed to safeguard waterways not only for aquatic life but also as a source of drinking water, transport and leisure for humans. This law, known as the Water Framework Directive, has a clear objective: to ensure all waterbodies reach at least “good status”, meaning they are clean, healthy and safe for swimming and drinking.
Built into the plan is a legal recognition that some waterbodies, especially in highly industrialised countries such as Germany, have been altered so extensively that returning them to their natural state would be impossible or potentially harmful to human interests and security. These are placed in a special category, called “heavily modified water bodies”, and are legally exempt from the requirement to achieve “good” status. They include reservoirs supplying drinking water, canals designed for navigation or drainage, urban rivers confined within concrete channels or culverts, ports, harbours and rivers drained for agricultural use.
Ireland’s plan to weaken legal protections for waterways will push many of them beyond recovery
Ireland’s remaining bogs can have a second tale - of creation rather than extraction
Ireland has 33 species of mayfly. Even under immense pressure from humans, they adapt
Irish hares are unique but the law of the land is against them
While they cannot be used as dumping grounds for pollutants, the law accepts that these waters will never be restored or naturalised. For that reason, the principle guiding “heavily modified” designation should be balanced and factor in whether it serves the widest possible interest: their number should be kept to a minimum, and where ongoing engineering and management is necessary – for example, in a reservoir or port – they must deliver significant benefit to the public.
Ireland has 33 heavily modified water bodies, including Poulaphouca reservoir, which provides drinking water to Dublin; Cork Harbour for industrial activity; and New Ross Port in Wexford, run by the council as a transport route. But under the department’s proposal, released in March, this number will increase by 1,312 per cent. It includes 122 waterbodies that run through some of Ireland’s unique natural areas. It includes stretches of the Nore, Brosna, Maigue, Liffey, Fergus, Mulkear and Carrowbeg rivers; lakes such as Lough Corrib and Lough Derg; and estuaries like Lower Suir.
Why does the State want to all but give up on these waters? The problem stems from a law dating back to 1945, the Arterial Drainage Act, which gives the State sweeping powers to carry out large-scale drainage works, such as deepening, widening, dredging and straightening. Eighty years ago – when we knew nothing about climate warming – the law was viewed as progressive; today it clashes with the Water Framework Directive because this extent of drainage causes severe damage, irreversibly stripping rivers of their natural life and course. Ireland cannot abide by one law with the other. As long as these waters are drained, they will never meet the standards set by EU water law.
Reservoirs, ports, canals and harbours must be operational, and as such, designating them as “heavily modified” is in the public interest, as their functional demands cannot be fulfilled while simultaneously attempting restoration. But in the future, who’ll benefit from the continual dredging of the Clare river in Galway, once one of our most natural rivers and now, in many parts, a canalised channel? Or the river Brosna, whose waters followed a meandering course through Offaly before its curves were straightened and its channel deepened? And how is it justified in the public interest, given that drainage makes our towns and cities more – not less – vulnerable to flash flooding?
Instead of reshaping drainage policy so that it’s fit for the critical challenges we face – not least, the chaotic mix of water shortages and drought, extreme weather events and rapidly warming waters – what’s proposed is simply remove these waters from any hope of being restored to full health. Never before have our waterways needed climate and nature-proofed policies more. Our waters are warming at levels never seen before – for example, in Lough Feeagh in Mayo, the heat in the water has been above the long-term average (recorded since 1960) since January. Sea temperatures have soared. This is the future for which we need to rapidly prepare.
Under the Nature Restoration Law, we’re required to restore at least 20 per cent of our land and sea areas by 2030, increasing to 90 per cent by 2050. That includes rewetting organic soils, like those at the headwaters of the river Boyne, which are currently drained. Instead of giving up on our waters and relegating them to a lower standard – all for the sake of an outdated, 80-year-old law – now is the time to put energy into nature-based solutions, which are proven to be effective and cheap as a way to reduce flood risk, improve soil health and meet climate, nature and water goals without abandoning the land.
We can’t ignore the facts: our waterways are facing immense pressure, and some are already critically ill. Even if our only concern was water security, the urgent need for restoration is clear. This proposal to weaken their legal protections will only speed up their deterioration.
Across Ireland, communities are volunteering to revive the life in their local waters. If this legal loophole is allowed, their efforts will be in vain. In effect, the State would be like a doctor unfit to practice – turning its back on the patient instead of providing care. As a result, many of our most treasured rivers and lakes will, without question, slip beyond recovery.
