Heritage sites across Ireland are already being damaged by extreme weather linked to climate change, with castles, forts and national parks among those most at risk.
A nationwide project to identify the historic landmarks most under threat could cost up to €2.3 million, according to internal records from the Heritage Council.
The documents warn that Ireland’s built, natural and cultural heritage is facing “accelerating climate pressures” from coastal erosion, flooding, and severe weather.
A briefing paper said Wild Nephin National Park in Mayo – which suffered a serious wildfire last year – will face a growing risk because of “rising temperatures and drier summers.”
It said: “A single large fire event can devastate peat soil, destroy sensitive flora and fauna, and leave landscapes susceptible to erosion.”
The Heritage Council report said Coolbanagher Castle in Laois had “withstood centuries of Irish weather.”
However, Storm Darwin in February 2014 caused a partial collapse requiring demolition of unstable sections soon after.
The paper also cited Dún Beag Promontory Fort in Kerry as very “susceptible to coastal erosion and higher-intensity storm surges.”
It said recent storms had already accelerated cliff-face collapses and projections for continued sea-level rise carried “increased peril.”
“Losing such monuments erodes the archaeological record that underpins Ireland’s ancient history,” the briefing said.
It recommended a nationwide survey of heritage assets to map which ones were most at risk from climate change.
The estimate for the project was €2.3 million over three years, including capital costs, staffing, consultancy, and contingency.
It suggested a core team be set up that would carry out field surveys and on-site inspections.
Also proposed were workshops, outreach materials, and consultations to make the public aware of the risks facing heritage sites.
As an initial step, the Heritage Council said it might be worth carrying out a pilot project, potentially in a “coastal county.”
The briefing said the project could be challenging as heritage information was “often incomplete or outdated.”
It said uncertain climate projections might also prove problematic in determining which specific sites were most in danger.
The paper added that getting stakeholders on board could be complex as private landowners might worry about the legal or financial implications of being designated “at risk.”
It said: “Clear communication of the possible benefits, including grant funding and professional advice, is intended to mitigate such concerns and encourage collaborative action.”
The briefing also said financing and staffing could pose further difficulties, but that funding might be available through national or EU grants.
It added, however, that having a single authoritative inventory of heritage at risk would be valuable so it could be addressed as “one coherent challenge.”
The paper said: “A consolidated catalogue of vulnerable sites will be more persuasive than generic statements on climate risk.”
A spokesman said: “The Heritage Council continues to work with colleagues across government to further refine the Climate Heritage at Risk initiative and align it with the work already underway across relevant government departments.
“This is an important piece of work, and we are committed to working collaboratively to deliver the best possible solution.”