Updating strategy LPIS NL

The NetherlandsLPIS update proces and

issues (Sophia Revisited)

Marcel Meijer&

Jaap Kroon

National Service for the Implementation of Regulations

Paying agency of the Dutch Ministry of

Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality

Updating strategy LPIS NLMinistry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality3

Outline1. Findings from the EC2. Cause of the findings3. Action plan4. Progress5. Problems6. Concluding remarks

Findings from the EC

• Reference layer is not 1) up-to-date, 2) accurate enough: non-conformity with art. 20 of 1782/2003

Reference parcels are insufficiently current regarding changes in physical borders (area) and vegetation (eligibility)Reference parcels are insufficiently detailed because certain ineligible parts (landscape elements) are not excluded

• Results of OTSC and CwRS, changes in the field submitted by applicants and current ortho-imagery are not followed up by an update of the concerned reference parcels

• Areas claimed in the 1st and 2nd pillar are not checked in an integrated GIS (only alphanumerically) and there is no exchange of results of OTSC, CwRS, and administrative controls.

Updating strategy LPIS NLMinistry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality4

Consequential Findings1. Ineffective administrative controls/cross checks: non

conformity with art. 24 of 796/20042. The EC doubted whether or not checks on eligibility were

performed.3. Applicants are supplied with incorrect information about

the eligible area: non conformity with art. 12 of 796/2004 4. Increased risk of incorrect applications for aid 5. No integrated sanction system for 1st and 2nd pillar (no

exchange of results of administrative controls and otsc)

The April 2009 audit was an evidence-based audit following the October2007 audit. The lag in the update cycle was now confirmed during thefield visits.

Updating strategy LPIS NLMinistry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality5

Cause of the findings EC (1)Backgroundinformation:

•NL uses for the determination and implementation of the LPIS the physical block as the reference unit

1. most in line with the actual situation in the field and with practice of land use (70% of the reference parcel = agricultural parcel)

2. nation-wide (including non-agricultural) and updatedTopographical file (Top10NL) already available from the Land Registration and Mapping Agency of the Netherlands's Cadastre

Updating strategy LPIS NLMinistry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality6

Cause of the findings EC (2)

3. Update cycle (from 2009 onwards 50% each year) and maintenance by the Cadastre with field visits and existing data files (e.g. orthophoto’s)

Updating strategy LPIS NLMinistry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality7

Cause of the findings EC (3)4. Only an abstract is made from the Top10NL, consisting of the

physical blocks which are classified as ‘agricultural blocks’ or ‘nature reserve areas’

• e.g. pasture, arable land, orchards, tree nursery, heath, forest

• boundaries are ‘hard boundaries’ like roads, waterways, forest, buildings

Updating strategy LPIS NLMinistry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality8

Cause of the findings EC (4)Things are not what the seem......

The Cadastre has not been able to supply NL with updated Top10 since 2006. As a consequence, and because of the earlier 25% update cycle, the LPIS partly contained reference parcels based on orthophotos older than 2003

Ineligible ‘landscape features’ like ditches, paths, small ponds, wooded banks, hedge rows, horse tracks, storages of manure, rubbish, etc are part of the reference parcel

Updating strategy LPIS NLMinistry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality9

Cause of the findings EC (5)Ditch: Main problem

Width of ditches is measured on the basis of the water surface.

Ditches < 6 meters wide are polylines in Top10. Reference parcel’s border is the diameter of the ditch.

Half the width of the water surface is added to the adjacent reference parcels area

Updating strategy LPIS NLMinistry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality10

5,5 meters

Some Examples

Updating strategy LPIS NLMinistry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality11

Some Examples

Updating strategy LPIS NLMinistry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality12

Updating strategy LPIS NLMinistry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality13

Plan of action (1)

Decision making

December 2008: the NL decided to have all ineligible landscape elements excluded from the reference layer. No use of exception mentioned in section 30, paragraph 2 or 3 of Reg 796/2004.

October 2008: NL agreed with EC to a calculated fine (over the years 2005-2007) based on a calculated risk. This calculation was based on the group applicants which had just enough or not enough eligible land to claim payment on their entitlements: high-risk group.

February 2009: the Ministry of Agriculture agreed to create a new reference layer for land used by the high-risk group

April 2009: EC felt that NL was not taking the problem seriously. And told us that they expected a complete overhaul of our reference layer and systems.

Plan of action (2)

• July 2009: Minister decided to

1. create a completely new reference layer 2. to have NSIR to do the management and updating of this

new reference layer (no longer by the Cadastre)

Implementation

The Cadastre is creating an entirely new reference layer based on the 2008 aerial photo, starting with the high-risk group, followed by otherpriority groups. By the end of this year NL will a completely new referencelayer for 1st and 2nd pillar.

Updating strategy LPIS NLMinistry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality14

Plan of action (3)Digitization process of reference parcel

The exclusion of non-eligible area (>100m2) within the reference parcel is based on a list of landscape elements which are to be excluded, according to specifications laid down by NL

All non-eligible (non-agricultural) land found at the boundaries of the reference parcel is to be excluded.

Only the eligible area is digitized: pasture, arable land, heath land, natural reserves and forest (negative approach of definition agricultural land)

New reference parcel = netto eligible area. Land scape elements will be added later on, based on the applications made under Rural Development Schemes (Second Pillar)

Updating strategy LPIS NLMinistry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality15

Plan of action (4)

Updating strategy LPIS NLMinistry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality16

Updating strategy LPIS NLMinistry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality17

Progress- Costs

- New Reference Layer € 6,5 mln.- System adjustments € 2,6 mln.- Maintenance New Reference Layer € 4,5 mln. estimated

- Planning- Reference layer related to the high-risk group 01-10-2009- Reference layer 100% 01-03-2010

- Results (thus far)- Within 4 months 40% of the reference has been created

Updating strategy LPIS NLMinistry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality18

ProblemsEligibility issues

ProblemsPermanent or not?

Updating strategy LPIS NLMinistry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality19

2008 2007

ProblemsAgricultural land or not?

Updating strategy LPIS NLMinistry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality20

Updating strategy LPIS NLMinistry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality21

ProblemsGarden?

ProblemsEncroachment

Updating strategy LPIS NLMinistry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality22

Green line = Crop parcelYellow line = Result OTSCBlue line = New Reference layer

Landscape features and GEAC (1)

Updating strategy LPIS NLMinistry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality23

Landscape features like ditches, small ponds, wooded banks,hedge rows are exluded from the agricultural area. (no applicationof article 30 sect. 2 or 3 from Reg. 796/2004):

• The same data is used for CAP and the nitrate directive• Not all Landscape features can be included• Exact size of landscape features isn’t known

Consequence:

GEAC in Pillar 1 applies only for ‘agricultural area’…..

In the Netherlands these excluded features are not subject to GEAC regulation

Landscape features and GEAC (2)

Updating strategy LPIS NLMinistry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality24

GAEC in Pillar 2 only applies to ‘non-agricultural land only insofar as support is claimed for that land’……….

Which means that GAEC in the Netherlands is only restricted to All of the agricultural area and the landscape features forwhich Second Pillar support is claimed.

GAEC is also aimed at retention of landscape features such as ditches, small ponds, wooded banks,hedge rows.

• Is national and regional legislation in NL sufficient?• How to deal with this?

Concluding remarksRegulations not very clear/helpful when it comes to creating andupdating a reference layer. - Especially when it comes to quality! - But also with regard to eligibility definitions.

Updating strategy LPIS NLMinistry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality25