Sligo clergy woman highlights plight of indigenous farmers in Guatemala where climate crisis causes crop failure
Rev Karen Duignan held up a corn cob and pineapple to symbolise the work Christian Aid is doing to help farmers in Guatemala's Alta Verapaz region to make a living, despite the intense heatwaves and harsh droughts that threaten their livelihoods.
Rev Karen is a member of Rathbarron Church of Ireland Parish near Coolaney. An 'Ordained Local Minister' who served for five years in a parish in County Mayo, she is currently studying for a MTh (Master in Theology) at the Church of Ireland Theological Institute in Dublin.
Forty per cent of Guatemala's Indigenous community live in extreme poverty, many without mains water, electricity or network coverage. Most rely on rain-fed farming to make their living but as the climate crisis brings longer and harsher droughts, crops are failing and hunger follows quickly. Across Guatemala, 46% of children aged under five experience stunting of their growth due to a lack of nutrition in their diet.
Corn, which is a staple food in Guatemala, is especially sensitive to drought but Christian Aid's local partner Congcoop has been encouraging farmers to reintroduce the ancient practice of 'companion planting' - first developed by Indigenous communities in the Americas - where corn, beans and squash are grown together in the same plot.
This practice boosts yields because the large squash leaves provide ground cover, suppressing weeds and retaining moisture, while the beans fix nitrogen, enriching the soil without the need for expensive fertilisers.
The Christian Aid funded project also encourages farmers to introduce pineapple which tolerates drought well.
Rev Karen supports Christian Aid though her ministry. Her 'corn and pineapple' gesture coincides with Christian Aid Week, which runs from 11-17 May and is believed to be the UK and Ireland's longest running fundraising campaign. The charity's work with Indigenous farming communities in Guatemala's 'Dry Corridor' is the focus of this year's Christian Aid Week appeal.
Christian Aid Ireland Chief Executive Rosamond Bennett thanked Rev Karen for highlighting the charity's work in Guatemala:
'The support of clergy members like Rev Karen and their congregations helps to fund the work that enables farmers in Guatemala to survive the blistering temperatures and harsh droughts, so they can feed themselves and their families.'
For more information and to support this year's Christian Aid Week appeal, please visit caweek.ie
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Examiner
13 hours ago
- Irish Examiner
Divorce on a farm - who keeps the house?
Dear Karen, I am getting a divorce from my wife, and I am farming. The family home is located on the family farm, and I would be anxious to keep it as it is in such close proximity to the farm. What typically happens in a situation like this? Dear Reader, The 'family home' is defined according to Section 2 (1) of the family Home Protection Act 1976 as 'primarily a dwelling in which a married couple ordinarily reside'. The family home cannot be sold without the consent of both spouses. The fact that the family home is in the name of one spouse does not negate the fact that the consent of the non-owning spouse is required for a sale. Section 3(1)of the 1976 Act states that where a spouse, without the prior consent in writing of the other spouse, purports to convey any interest in the family home to any person except the other spouse, then, subject to the purported conveyance shall be void. The family home in farming situations is unique due to the fact that it is usually in close proximity to the farmyard and lands. The farmer, also due to the nature of farming, needs to be located near the farm, as his or her presence can be required on the farm at a moment's notice. Where a spouse is departing the family home because it is not reasonable or practical to remain, the court will usually award an amount to be given to provide alternative accommodation, provided that the remaining spouse has sufficient assets and income to provide this lump sum. The court can make a number of Property Adjustment Orders and Sale Orders in relation to the family home, such as the transfer of the family home which is in the name of one spouse to the non-owning spouse, extinguishment or removal of the interest of a spouse in the family home or sale of the family home. The transfer of property can be made whether or not one spouse has made a financial contribution to the purchase of the property. The court can also allow a spouse to remain in the family home until such time as the children reach a certain age and then direct that the family home be sold and the proceeds divided between spouses or given to one particular spouse. In the case of C vs. C, the applicant husband had a strong claim to the family home that he had previously inherited, and his wife had not contributed to the property either directly or indirectly. The court took the view that the division of assets was not appropriate in this case in the circumstances where a proper provision was still made for the wife by providing her with a new house and maintenance for the children and herself. However, it should be noted that the facts of every case are different, and there are no strict rules to determine how assets should be dealt with in this type of proceeding. In the case of COC vs DOC, the court found that the needs of the family as a whole must be considered. The family home was the only property to retain any realistic equity given the precarious nature of the husband's financial circumstances. The needs of the wife and the dependent children were most closely met by transferring the entire interest in the family home to the wife. Karen Walsh, from a farming background, is a solicitor practising at Walsh & Partners Solicitors, 17 South Mall, Cork, and 88 Main Street, Midleton, Co Cork, and also the author of 'Farming and the Law'. Walsh & Partners also specialises in personal injury claims, conveyancing, probate, and family law. Email: info@ Web: While every effort is taken to ensure the accuracy of the information contained in this article, Karen Walsh does not accept responsibility for errors or omissions howsoever arising. Readers should seek legal advice in relation to their particular circumstances at the earliest opportunity.
Irish Examiner
7 days ago
- Irish Examiner
Ask a solicitor: Should I be worried about trespassers on my land?
Dear Karen, I am always concerned about trespassers coming on my land and making a claim against me. It seems very unfair that they possibly could. What is the law in relation to this? Dear Reader, This is a worry for many landowners. A trespasser is defined as 'an entrant, other than a recreational user or a visitor'. Such entrants do not have permission or authority to be present on the property. A burglar falls within this definition. The duty owed to trespassers is set out in Section 4 of the Occupiers Liability Act 1995. It is similar to that owed to recreational users. However, an occupier may not be liable for injury or damage unintentionally caused to a person who enters on land or premises for the purposes of committing an offence, unless the court determines otherwise. The decision of the court will be based on the facts of the case. In the case of Williams vs. TP Wallace Construction Limited, the entrant plaintiff did not have permission or authority to be on the property in question. The defendant company had hired the plaintiff to install guttering at a shopping centre. On the day of the accident, the plaintiff attended the defendant's premises unannounced in order to establish whether the job was being carried out properly. The plaintiff proceeded to inspect the site without express permission while the site workers were on a break and the architect was not present. The plaintiff sued the defendant for injuries he sustained as a result of a fall from a ladder, which was not tied to the scaffolding. The plaintiff contended that the defendant was negligent in failing to have the ladder secured. The court held that the plaintiff was not a visitor, but was instead a trespasser, because he was not on the site by invitation or arrangement. The court found in favour of the defendant and dismissed the plaintiff's case on the basis that the failure to tie the ladder to the scaffolding was not an act of reckless disregard, and the defendant did not breach his duty to the plaintiff, a trespasser, in this regard. The 1995 Act does not draw a distinction between an adult and a child, so a child is owed the same duty of care, however gauging the standard of reckless disregard, the court must have regard of all circumstances, such as the conduct of the person, and the care that he or she may reasonably be expected to take for his or her own safety while on a premises. Naturally, a child is not aware of dangers as an adult would be, and they may ignore or fail to understand warning signs. As a result, the courts have traditionally afforded more leniency to children who come onto premises as a trespasser, if it could be shown that the child was at an age that he or she would 'follow a bait as mechanically as a fish' and the occupier's premises contained 'an allurement'. The case law states that in order for something to be an allurement, it must be both 'fascinating and fatal'. In the case of O'Leary vs John A. Wood Limited, the court held that 'an object should not be considered an allurement unless the temptations which it presents are such that no normal child could be expected to restrain themselves from intermeddling even if he knows that to intermeddle is wrong'. Clearly, the allurement approach in these types of cases is of great benefit to children, but the courts appear to have taken a restrictive approach so as to ensure that the net for liability is not cast so widely as to be unjust. Karen Walsh, from a farming background, is a solicitor practising at Walsh & Partners Solicitors, 17 South Mall, Cork, and 88 Main Street, Midleton, Co Cork, and also the author of 'Farming and the Law'. Walsh & Partners also specialises in personal injury claims, conveyancing, probate, and family law. Email: info@ Web: While every effort is taken to ensure the accuracy of the information contained in this article, Karen Walsh does not accept responsibility for errors or omissions howsoever arising. Readers should seek legal advice in relation to their particular circumstances at the earliest opportunity. Read More Ask a solicitor: A contractor fell off a ladder on my farm
RTÉ News
28-05-2025
- RTÉ News
Australia's bid for ancient rock art World Heritage listing stalls over pollution
Australia's bid to secure World Heritage status for a site with Indigenous rock art estimated to be 50,000 years old has been dealt a blow after a UN advisory body warned it was at risk from nearby industrial pollution. The International Council on Monuments and Sites advised UNESCO to refer the nomination back to the Australian government so it could "prevent any further industrial development adjacent to, and within, the Murujuga Cultural Landscape". Located on the Burrup Peninsula in Western Australia state, the Murujuga rock art, which is of cultural and spiritual significance to local Indigenous Australians, was nominated for heritage listing in 2023. The Burrup Peninsula is also a key industrial hub, home to two gas plants run by Woodside, and fertiliser and explosives plants run by Norway's Yara International. The government extended the lifetime of Woodside's largest gas plant in the region, the North West Shelf, until 2070. The extension will generate up to 4.3 billion metric tons of additional carbon emissions. Scrutiny over the impact of Australia's resources industry on Indigenous heritage sites has been magnified since Rio Tinto destroyed the 46,000-year-old Juukan Gorge rock shelters as part of a mine expansion in 2020. Australia has said the Murujuga petroglyphs were in "good condition overall" and presented findings from a study of the site that said there were no suggestions "acid rain or deposition is contributing to damage of the rock art". Despite this, ICOMOS recommended preventing further industrial development near the site and called for a "decommissioning and rehabilitation plan for existing industrial activities". ICOMOS, citing media reports quoting rock art experts and information received about the proposed North West Shelf extension, concluded: "The conservation conditions of the petroglyphs are extremely vulnerable and threatened by industrial acidic emissions". Cultural heritage expert at Deakin University Luke James, said the ICOMOS draft decision was a "setback" for the Australian government. "ICOMOS has identified some concerns around protection and management," he said. "It is now up to the Australian government to demonstrate to the committee that these are surmountable, or it will need to wait at least a year - and do further work - for another chance at inscription." Woodside said in a statement it continued to support the heritage listing of the rock art and would work with the Murujuga traditional owners and government to prepare its response to ICOMOS' recommendation. "We believe the World Heritage nomination should proceed on the strength of the evidence and stand as proof that cultural heritage and industry can responsibly co-exist when collaboration, transparency and rigorous scientific monitoring are in place," it said.
