JARVEYS OPERATING in Killarney National Park were yesterday dealt a setback in their campaign against the use of dung catchers when a court refused to continue an order allowing them access part of the park.
The jarveys were unable to access part of the park after bollards were erected on July 14th at its entrances by the National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS) following the jarveys’ refusal to attach dung catchers.
An interim order was secured earlier this month to lower the bollards but yesterday Mr Justice Peter Charleton refused to continue the order pending the outcome of the full action.
The jarveys claimed veterinary and insurance advice was that the dung catchers posed a risk to the safety of their customers. They claimed the catchers render the horse’s tail immovable, meaning they could not swat flies effectively and causing them to become irritable and potentially dangerous.
Opposing the injunction, the park service said paths used by walking tourists were becoming seriously fouled with the dung,turning into slurry with rain. It would cost €100,000 a year to provide cleaning machines, as an alternative to the dung catchers, when the jarveys paid just €25 a year for a licence to ply their trade.
When the jarveys refused to use the dung catchers, the park service said it had no option but to install the bollards at the entrance to a section of the park.
Yesterday Mr Justice Charleton urged the jarveys and the NPWS to engage over the next couple of days to come to an arrangement for the rest of the tourist season. The judge said he expected the park service would provide free dung catchers for a period to enable the scheme to work.
Earlier, refusing the continuing injunction on the basis no fair issue had been made out to be tried, the judge said the jarveys were bound by bylaws governing the park and under which the jarveys were issued their licences.
He rejected their argument that they had traditional rights to use the park or that they had been discriminated against in relation to other park users. He believed the use of the dung catchers involved putting “a plastic device at the back of the horse” and was no more intrusive than reins and the shafts of the carriage.