Vote 55—Forestry (Resumed).

Mr. Brennan

I was speaking, Sir, on this Estimate last night when the House adjourned, and I was endeavouring to point out to the Minister and to the House that, in my opinion, there has not been any serious effort made, either by this or the previous Administration, to tackle forestry. Now, as I pointed out last night, it is very evident from the fact that there is a carry-over of over £40,000 and an accumulation of £5,000 per annum which has not been utilised by the Forestry Department—that, in itself, is condemnatory of the activity of the Department. I was also pointing out that the sum of £650 per annum, which is the expenditure incurred under D(1) —Grants and Advances for Afforestation Purposes—shows the absolute futility of the particular type of inducement which the Department was endeavouring to offer to people to give land for the purpose of afforestation.

The Minister, in the opening remarks, pointed out to us that if any person was so disposed as to give land amounting to five acres, or two persons joined together to do that, the Department was prepared to give a subsidy of £4 per acre, paid in two instalments, to these people who help them with fencing and sowing. The fact, that in the Twenty-Six Counties only £650 has been paid out shows that that scheme has been a complete failure. There might be some hope for a scheme of that kind if the inducements were so that this House was paying out a sum of possibly £60,000 or £100,000 per annum, because this is a very important matter and, personally, I think that some Government or some board, or some Forestry Department if we are ever going to get anywhere in forestry, would have to take a plunge in this matter. Possibly there might be thousands lost but we will never get anywhere the way we are tackling the problem. I think a scheme could be evolved, instead of that particular scheme of a subsidy of £4 per acre, whereby farmers and land-owners all over the country who would have five, or six, or ten acres of land that they did not really value for grazing purposes or for tillage purposes, and were prepared to give that for plenting, I think the Government Department should say to these people, "if you give us ten acres we will plant it for you and we will pay the whole cost of it." See what you would be doing in that case. Let us examine it. In the first place the owner of the land would be forfeiting, during his life-time at least, all profits from that particular portion of the land. The Forestry Department would be setting up all over the country a number of small plantations which would afterwards come in under the ordinary scheme of afforestation which prescribes that for every tree cut, one must be planted. If we could get, by any means whatever, even though it cost a good deal of money, to a point at which we had a certain reasonable amount of forest cover, then, by applying the condition that for every tree cut one must be planted, we would be able to maintain it. We will never get that by the methods we are working on at the moment. Some people might think it a far-fetched idea that the State should say to a farmer: "If you lend us 100 acres of land, we will plant them "even though that land reverts to his grandchild later on, but after all, it is an asset to the State and if we cannot find some other way of dealing with the matter, we ought to try something like that. As I say, it might be regarded as far-fetched that the State should plant a man's land for him and then leave him in possession of the land and the plantation, but at least we would be getting somewhere and we are not getting anywhere by present methods.

There are huge potentialities in forestry, and a great deal of attention has been drawn to the matter recently. I think the Minister should take the bull by the horns and set up a board, a commission or some organisation of persons who would interest themselves in forestry. With that could be coupled, not alone the benefits which the State would derive from forestry itself, but the benefit derived from the reclamation of land in giving work— decent work and devent wages—to the unemployed. The Minister was asked how many acres were fit for forestry, but I would not be so much concerned with the figure at all, because there is a much greater area which can be made available with a certain amount of labour, and the labour is there. The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance has been looking for schemes for years past, so that he might spend money in relief of unemployment and distress. I think this is a good way out and I think that, sooner or later, it can be tackled in that way.

Deputy Mongan spoke here last night in Irish, and I suppose his speech was not followed by the majority of Deputies. I think, however, that he accused the Minister for Lands of a very gross libel on Connemara at the recent Fianna Fáil Ard-Fheis. I would not say that the Minister for Lands would be deliberately guilty of a gross libel on any person or place, but I think the facts justify what Deputy Mongan said last night. According to the report of the Fianna Fáil Ard-Fheis—and I am sure the Minister for Lands would not contradict the Irish Press report—the Minister, when questioned with regard to afforestation by some people in County Galway, said:—

"A certain district in Galway called Knockboy was planted under the old Congested Districts Board. The scheme cost £30,000 and the scheme was a complete failure. After 36 years, the few trees that lived were no thicker than a man's arm."

I think it is really time that the ghost of Knockboy was laid, and I think that Deputy Mongan went a fair way towards doing it. He quoted, and he gave me the volume afterwards, from the annual report of the Congested Districts Board for Ireland, Volume 1. The eighth report sets out the figures expended on Knockboy, amounting in all to £8,000, and not £30,000, as the Minister said.

The first time I visited Connemara, some years ago, the district was pointed out to me by a person living there as one of the great British blunders. I still think that district represents a British blunder and I still think it can grow timber. I do not think it is fair that, at this hour of the day, the Minister and people in the Forestry Department should endeavour to perpetuate the libel on that district. If the Minister wants proof that trees will grow, and grow well, there, let him go down and see places in which some individuals have planted trees. I admit the positions may be more sheltered, but it is nearly half a century ago since the British Government tried that experiment, and surely we have made advances in half a century. I believe that from the scientific point of view advances have been made, and, in the matter of forestry, there are at present better ideas with regard to shelter and sheltering shrubs for the young saplings than there were 50 years ago. As Deputy Mongan pointed out, the conditions under which this planting was carried out were entirely abnormal, and it was absolutely impossible for the trees to survive. He pointed out, for instance, that the trees came in thousands on a steamer and were landed at a little place called Kilkevin. At that time there were very poor roads and very few horses and carts to travel them, such as they were, in Connemara. I believe that in all the parish there were not six horses and carts to transport the tree. According to my information and to what Deputy Mongan said, those trees lay for weeks, and in fact for months, before they were planted.

Before a responsible Minister or any responsible officials would endeavour to pronounce judgment on a matter like that, surely they ought to inquire into it. I have no doubt whatever that what the Minister said about it was said in perfectly good faith, but at the same time, I have no doubt, that the whole thing should be retried, or at least to some extent. It happened in 1890, and it continued for six or seven years. The whole report is available, and the whole expenditure is available. There are some extraordinary figures to be found in the figures of expenditure. For instance, in one year the expenditure on planting is shown to be £300 odd, and only a small number of trees were planted. In the following year the number of trees was about four times as great, while the cost of planting was half the previous figure. There is something to be read between the lines. I believe that half the trees brought there were not planted because they were ruined by exposure. I know that district, and a good many other districts in Connemara, and I agree with what Deputy Dowdall said last night, that much of the land in Connemara and other places is more suitable for planting and growing timber than the lands of Southern France of which such a success was made.

If we are going to get anywhere in this matter it must be tackled boldly. Let us not falter even at the loss of a few thousand pounds because it is better to do that if we are to make a success of it. There is no doubt that if there was some compelling influence to force us to drain an amount of land that wants draining to-morow and make it suitable for afforestation, we would find a way. i advise the Minister to tackle this question and to tackle it by setting up some kind of board—let it be a mobile board or a commission—that will try to get to the bottom of this problem, and will try to interest local authorities and individuals in it. Only in that way, be educating the people and getting them interested, will we ever get to the position which we ought to occupy with regard to forestry. It is really sad to make any comparison between the forest-cover in this country and that of any other country. It has been admitted that it would be beneficial to health, to the weather, to the State and to everybody to have the country re-afforested. That matter ought to be tackled in a way that would make it a success, if it can be done at all.

Mr. Kennedy

There is supposed to be a law that when a tree is cut down it is to be replaced by a sapling. That law is not enforced. I should like to see a law in operation by which a person cutting down a tree would be required to replace it by two saplings. As the law is, however, it is not observed. Deputy Roddy, when speaking on this Vote, said that we should handle the problem ourselves and that we should not import foreigners to deal with it for us. I think that we imported with success one foreigner on loan to this Department. During the short time he was here, he left his mark very effectively on afforestation. In my county large tracts of land have been laid down by the Forestry Department. The work has been an unqualified success and portion of that success is due to the work of Dr. Reinhardt.

Deputy Corry asked why we imported trees from abroad. My attitude on this problem is that if we had to go to the farthest end of the world to get trees suited to this climate, it would be up to us to do so. We should take lessons nto only from the German forests but from the manner in which problems have been dealt with the central and western America. There they have successfully dealt with the problem of land erosion by the cultivation of undergrowth and scrub and planting when the undergrowth and scrub create a suitable holding for the forest tree. I do not pretend to be very expert on this matter but, from observation of the work going on in County Westmeath, I propose to offer my comment and criticism.

I understand that there are two schools of thought in the matter of forestry in these countries. There are the Scottish school and the English school. The Scottish school goes in for soft woods and the English school goes in for hard woods. It would appear that the Scottish school has had its way up to lately. More hard wood is being grown here now and I hope that, in future, the amount will be greater than that of the other wood. Deputy Dowdall spoke about the inferiority complex amongst us in the matter of forestry as well as in other things. It is a proved fact that Irish timber is exported in the round from here, dry-kilned in England and imported here in the form of manufactured articles. I have it from the manager of one of these huge saw-mills in Staffordshire that Irish ash is better than any European ash, and that Irish elm and Irish beech are equal to the best products of Poland. That being so, it is a reason why the cultivation of hard woods here should be encouraged.

The Minister said that a definite programme in planting has been in operation here since 1932. I should like to know what cuttings have been made during that period of years and whether or not they were made for the thinning of the woods. The Minister also spoke of saw-mills in certain areas. I should like him to elucidate that matter for us and tell us what was done with the wood when cut-how it was utilised. He might also tell us if these saw-mills are under the control of the forestry Department. I should like to know if, when an estate containing a considerable amount of timber is taken over, the Forestry Government takes that timber and, if they have a commercial side to their activities, does that commercial side cut the timber and sell it. Perhaps the Minister would say if any foreign firm has a monopoly of that timber or if it is put up for competition amongst the public. These questions have arisen in my constituency and I want to put them to the Minister because we have a couple of fairly successful saw-mills in our county.

The Minister referred to the declining number of schools participating in Arbor Day. He ought to get into touch with his colleague, the Minister for Education, and tell him what every schoolboy knows—that the month of April is not the month for planting trees. Anybody reading the paper can see that the schools that have carried on Arbor Day have planted in the end of March or the month of April. I have seen in my own county these trees planted, but they never came to anything. I have seen them planted all over the country. I have seen them planted in April at the new hospital in Mullingar, and they are a failure. Everybody knows, without having expert knowledge of forestry, that November, December and January are the months for successful planting of forest trees and not the month of April, when the sap is running up the stem of the tree. Forestry is very necessary, as we understand, from the point of view of preservation of the soil on certain heights where winds operate, but I question Deputy Dowdall's contention about the wonderful return from Forestry. He gave us figures to show that an acre of mountain land returned 3/9 in sheep-rearing and £21 for forestry.

It takes 60 years for a forest of soft wood to mature. At that rate there would not be fabulous fortunes made. As regards the 3/9 yield from a mountainy sheep, I take it that the ordinary wool, apart from the lambs, would be represented by the 3/9. I also take it that unless it would be on the top of Carrantuohill, an acre of mountainy land would rear at least one mountainy sheep. Therefore my contention is that, while it may be necessary for the welfare of the nation as a whole, if we take in the cost of planting and preparation of soil and everything else, I do not imagine there is the gold mine in it that Deputy Dowdall has been advised there is.

I should like the Minister to give us an idea of the working of a forestry unit. I ask for this information because maybe in it there would be a solution to the problem as I see it. We are told that it is only the worst land that a farmer wants to give up for forests. Very often the worst land is not able to produce forests. Then the Department are up against the problem that they have not enough land to permit them to go on with the work. I understand that they want at least 300 acres within a certain radius. They have got that in a couple of places in Westmeath, and perhaps more. When they have planted the acreage in their possession, I wonder is it possible for them to extend their operations by planting the small pieces of land that may be available. If a man has three or four or ten acres in the vicinity of a forest, is it possible for the forester to go out and prepare small pieces of land adjoining, and add them to the unit and care for them in the ordinary way? This theory about millions of acres being available—

Mr. Anthony

All bunkum, and it is about time they knew that.

Mr. Kennedy

Indeed it is, so far as most of the country is concerned. There has been very effective work done in my county and I know of no work thatmen are so glad to get before forestry. They take a deep interest in it. It has not the drab monotony of road-making. They like the work. The time is unbroken and they will not go to any other work in preference. Several score of men have been employed and they are anxious when the season comes round to be employed again. They have come to me and to other Deputies and they have got us to call on farmers who have land adjoining the area, to ask them to dispose of some of their land to the Land Commission for forestry purposes. It is healthy work, and I hope that the Land Commission will continue the work they have begun in Westmeath and that they will think well of extending it to other counties.

Mr. Brodrick

I think I can say for the House that we are all agreed on the need for a sound forestry scheme. If we are to take this matter of forestry seriously, more money will have to be spent. I believe we should take it seriously. If we look back on former plantations, we will realise what a benefit they were to the country both from the point of view of shelter and of climate. I am rather surprised that a greater effort has not been made in the matter of planting. The Minister told us that he has 8,500 acres planted and he intends to plant about 10,000 acres in the coming year. I think the Minister has not taken this matter in a sufficiently serious way when he can plant only 10,000 acres in the one year. If you look at the Estimates you will find that under the sub-head dealing with cultural operations there were only 82 men employed last year and there is provision for only 85 in this year's Estimate. I would not say that that number is sufficient for our country. Then you come to the sub-head dealing with grants for afforestation. In the Estimates for 1933-34 there were grants to the extent of £500 given in that year, and in the current year's Estimates it is proposed to give £600. Does the Minister seriously think we are going to go ahead under such condition? I think the amount given in grants in 1933-34 were not at all sufficient, and now, five years after, all we have made provision for is £600.

In the matter of forestry education you will find that the sub-head in 1934-35 made provision for £300, and in the present year's Estimates the amount is only £260. How can the Minister claim that we are progressing if he does not make a better provision than that? Surely there should be more given towards education in forestry. There is every indication that the country needs a sound forestry scheme. There is plenty of land available and just fancy that for forestry education we have provision made for only two scholarships totalling £260. I think the Minister ought to devote more attention to the Forestry Department. Deputy Kennedy mentioned that the Forestry Department refused to take land under 300 acres in extent for planting purposes. They say that any area under 300 acres is not economic. Even if it is not economic at the moment, in time to come it will be a great benefit to the country. It may be a bit more costly at the present time, but I believe that with smaller plantations the people will derive greater benefit out of it. I urge the Minister to give this matter further consideration. By sticking to a minimum area of 300 acres he is certainly not going to progress. The Department must realise that it is a very difficult thing to find 300 acres in any county for planting purposes. I know it would be very difficult to find 300 acres in one particular place, even in my own county.

I would ask the Minister to come along and pick out smaller areas. He would be doing useful work in that way. I know that even in my own constituency there is a good portion of East Galway, and there are, particularly in West Galway, estates that have been offered for afforestation. I put down questions here a few times in connection with estates that are for division in the hands of the Land Commission. The Land Commission were waiting to see how much forestry land would be got out of that estate. There is the French estate, which comprises about 800 or 900 acres, and at the present time 400 acres of that estate is under timber. In a few year's time that timber will lose its commercial value. I do not believe in leaving timber like that stand. It may look well from the scenic point of view, but when timber is losing its commercial value it should be cut down, and the place replanted. I have seen where a number of plantations were cut down and the land was not replanted. I find on inquiring that the Land Commission made no order for replanting those areas. Some of these are very small, not exceeding half-an-acre, but I hold that even where there were only 40 trees in a plantation, and these were cut down, some order should be made to replant.

Last year I questioned the Minister about replanting in Connemara. I am not going to bring in the case of Cnoc Buidhe on this occasion. I think the Minister heard enough already about that. I would like, however, to get some information from the Minister as to what progress has been made in the amount of land suitable for planting in Galway, and I put down a question. That was on the 25th February, 1937, Volume 65, column 1035. The question was:—

"To ask the Minister for Lands if he has received from his inspectors a report on the suitability of Connemara for large schemes of afforestation, and if he will state for the latest available date, the total area so far acquired for planting, together with the total amount planted."

The answer of the Minister on that occasion was:—

"Very considerable areas have been inspected in the Clifden and Kylemore districts, in the districts around Cashel and Rosmuck, at Seecon, south-west of Oughterard, and in the district around Costello, but none of the land so far offered for sale for afforestation has been found to be suitable for the purpose. It is proposed to continue investigations to see whether land suitable for State forestry purposes is obtainable. The only forest centre which it has been possible so far to establish is at Ross, on the edge of Connemara. An area of 285 acres has been acquired here, and approximately 270 acres have been planted."

On a later date I put down another question and got further information from the Minister. I practically repeated the question that I have just read and the Minister's answer is:

"The following lands offered for forestry purposes in Connemara have been inspected and found to be unsuitable:—

1. 1,000 acres offered by tenants at Tiernee, Lettermore.

2. 700 acres about two miles from Clifden, offered by tenants on the former Berridge estate, and 300 acres about seven miles from Clifden, at Derryvickrine, by tenants on the former estate of Richard Foreman, and a few other small areas in the same district.

3. about 1,000 acres at Kylemore, offered by the Land Commission and comprising portions of the former estate of the Benedictine-Nuns and the Talbot Clifden estate.

4. 1,900 acres of the Costelloe estate at Lough Seecon.

5. 3.049 acres on the O'Meara estate, between Cashel and Rosmuck.

6. A very large area at Cloosh and Orid, offered by the Land Commission.

7. 300 acres at Athry, Recess, offered by tenants on the former Berridge estate.

8. 1,000 acres at Shindilea, Maam Cross, offered by the tenant, Mr. Lyons.

9. About 400 acres at Cnoc Buidhe, Recess, offered by Mrs. Betts.

The reasons for rejection were either exposure or unsuitable soil conditions or a combination of both reasons. As the Deputy has already been informed, investigations are proceeding with a view to obtaining land suitable for acquisition for afforestation."

Now that is the answer. Where there are 10,000 acres in Connemara available for afforestation only 270 acres are, according to the inspector's reports, fit for tree planting. I would like to know whether the Minister is quite satisfied with the reports made by his experts who had been down there and whether these experts were aware of the difference in the climate of the countries from which they came as compared with the climate of this country? I would like to know from the Minister if he is quite satisfied with the advance made by afforestation in Connemara? Is he satisfied that out of 10,000 acres only 270 acres are fit for tree planting? I have been waiting a long time to get an answer on that point from the Minister. If that is the progress that we are going to make on this matter I think it is just as good for us not to waste any further time on it. On the other hand if we intend to go ahead with forestry let us spend the money usefully and let us get land that is suitable. I know Connemara well and a number of Deputies in the House know it as well as I do. Deputy Bartley knows that in the Cloosh valley a scheme is going on at present and in the progress of that scheme the roots of trees tat grew there some years ago have been rooted up.

If trees grew there then, why should they not grow now? There are areas close to Clifden which are exposed to the sea. There are such areas as Ballynahinch and Ballyconneely where trees have been grown. How did these trees grow? I would like to urge on the Minister to consider the taking up or smaller areas for planting and make more money available for education in forestry. He might give more money in grants to people for planting their own land. A sum of £600 per annum is of no use in the way of tackling that question. If he people of the country are given and inducement to plant, they will plant. The best way to induce them to do so is to get them to plant small areas, for which they might be given a reasonable grant. The Land Commission give money for the reclamation of land. If the Forestry Department came along and dealt in the same way with the people as the Land Commission is doing in the matter of reclamation, a great deal of planting could be done at a very small cost.

Mr. Anthony

I never listened to so much unenlightened opinion since I came into the House as I have listened to in the course of the discussion on this Vote. A great many Deputies appear to be possessed of the idea that the Minister for Lands had only to suggest: "Let us put under forestry so many thousands of acres of land." and that the job would be done. Last evening we had a speech from a great star on this Vote. I notice that star is now absent. However, I am chiefly concerned with the want of knowledge displayed by so many Deputies who advocated the using of certain areas of land in various parts of the country for forestry purposes. I heard the word "true" from some of the Labour Deputies, but I should like them to indicate where these lands are to be found in County Cork, having regard all the time to the suitability and the adaptability of these lands. Anybody who has any experience at all must know that the Minister for Lands is right when he says that there are many areas in this country which are not suitable for re-afforestation. When the Land Commission begin to examine these areas, they find that the soil for some reason or other is not suitable for plantation purposes.

I have a very intimate knowledge of Cork County and portion of Kerry. I am not a theorist. I am not one of those people who will tell you that you can re-afforest the whole of Ireland, because I know you cannot. I have experience of very many portions of Cork, portions of Kerry, and even portions of Clare, where I could find many areas suitable for re-afforestation, but there are many other areas in these counties which are not suitable. The only fault I have to find with the Land Commission is that the areas which they think fit for re-afforestation are too large. I know the areas about which I am speaking.

It may happen that possibly 100 acres in a particular area are suitable for reafforestation, for the planting of young trees such as larch and other native varieties, but the planting of these 100 acres will completely exhaust the potentialities, as far as afforestation is concerned, of that area. Persons who are engaged in horticulture will understand that some trees take a longer time to develop than others. We find common agreement on this, at any rate, that there are certain areas in which one would require, as the Department does require, to have a continuous streak of land on which you must grow trees. For a moment, let us forget the class of trees.

I am personally aware of some useful experiments carried out by the Department. I know of one experiment at least that has been highly successful. That is the scheme carried out by the Department in the Ballyhooly area of Cork. I had some regrets in connection with that scheme because it was an area over which I had shooting rights for many years. Quite contiguous to that area was another portion of land which the Department very properly took over, but they discovered quite early that it was not suitable for the growing of trees indigenous to that part of the country. After all, you must admit, and I think no member of the Labour Party will disagree with me, that the cobbler should stick to his last. Every man should stick to his own job. There are experts in the Forestry Department and they, I presume, know their job. When the Department of Lands came to that portion of the scheme their experts said: "These lands are not fit for reafforestation." I know the lands myself and I talk by the book. I shot over these lands for 18 or 20 years.

I must say that I never heard more ignorance displayed in any debate than I have heard in the debate on this Vote. In my opinion the Minister for Lands and his officials have done the very best thing under all the circumstances. Let us face up to the facts.

I disagree with the acreage for forestry contemplated by the Department. I saw plantations on two different estates 35 years ago and when they grew up they liquidated the debts on these estates. That was a big thing in those days. I want to pay a tribute to the Department, because it is doing its best to implement what has been talked about regarding reafforestation. I know that Deputy Dowdall does not agree with me or with anyone else in that respect, because he talked of the abysmal ignorance of the Department. He also spoke about a certain book. We could all talk about books. I could mention books, but some of them would not be passed by the censor. I feel that there is room for a lot of enlightenment in matters of this kind. The Department is doing its best for reafforestation but all the time it is "cribbed, cabined and confined" to a certain acreage. I do not want to cast any aspersions on officials, who are there to implement and to carry out the policy of the Department. If the Department says that it is agreeable to plant 100 acres, 200 acres or 300 acres with trees, it will certainly be done by the officials as servants of the State. I want Deputies to understand that the fault does not lie with the officials or with the Department, but with the Minister. If it is his policy that the work is to be done, it will be done. If the Minister declares that it is the policy of the Government and of the Department to reafforest, say, 100 acres of land and then another 100 acres, if that could be done it would get rid of a lot of objections raised to reafforestation. There is a great deal to be said for reafforestation and for carrying out that policy in a grand way. I believe the Minister is in entire sympathy with any move that will tend to create more employment and tend to benefit the country, and for that reason I am going to support this Vote which, I hope, will pass without any division.

Donnchadha O Briain

Ba mhaith liom poinnte amháin a chur os cóir an Aire. Baineann sé le leagadh na gcoillte. Bhí daoine ag cainnt liom agus ag gearán go géar mar gheall ar an gceist seo. Tuigim go bhfuil dlí ann in aghaidh crann do leagadh gan cead ó Choimisiún na Talmhan. Ní hamháin go bhfuiltear á leagadh ach táthar á gcur thar sáile agus baineann sé sin go háirithe leis an bhfuinnseoig. Deirtear liom ná beidh go leor adhmaid ann dúinn féin má leantar den leagadh so. Tá an t-adhmad so ag teastáil ó shiúinéirí agus ó fheirmeóirí. Níl a fhios agam an fíor é nó nach fíor ach deirtear liom go bhfuil cuid mhaith dhe á chur thar sáile fé chead ón Roinn Tailte. Ceapaim gur ceart stop do chur leis sin—i dtaobh an adhmaid seo go háirithe. Ba mhaith liom eolas fháil maidir leis an gceist sin—an bhfuil cead á thabhairt do Shasanaigh agus d'Albanaigh teacht isteach sa tír seo agus na coillte do cheannach agus an t-adhmad do chur thar sáile? Más fíor é, iarraim ar an Aire stad do chur leis an nós so agus gan cead do thabhairt do dhream iasachta ar bith teacht isteach annso agus an t-adhmad do thógaint amach as an tír.

Mr. Finlay

Before I deal with the question of reafforestation I wish to call attention to what I consider to be a very regrettable happening and to contradict statements made by my colleague from Leix-Offaly, Deputy Davin, upon a previous Vote. Speaking in this House on the 7th April, the Deputy said that when a vote was called, on a motion regarding wages paid on reafforestation work, Deputy Finlay, Deputy O'Higgins and Deputy Donnelly—how he brought Deputy Donnelly into it I do not know—did not take part in it. The Deputy said that these Deputies were out smoking in the hall.

Mr. Anthony

Why not?

Mr. Finlay

I must say to the credit of Deputy Davin that he did not entertain us in the Restaurant with cocktails. I could not let the matter pass. I will not let it go with Deputy Davin, who is a member of the Labour Party. Mr. Davin——

An Ceann Comhairle

Deputy Davin.

Mr. Finlay

Deputy Davin seems to excite himself about Leix-Offaly. At the present time his excitement has been curtailed, as far as I can see, because of the disagreement about what I call the London Pact. It appears that he was not in the running, so he wants to get some other platform. I think I am quite justified in quoting what the Deputy said on the 7th April. The Deputy was under fire last night at the hands of the Minister for Lands. I would not like to see my own representative under fire, but the Minister for Lands had Deputy Davin under fire last night. This is the quotation from the Deputy's speech on April 7th.

"Following that debate and the division which was taken on that occasion, in which the Minister escaped with the narrow majority of two votes, we had other interesting developments inside a short period. On that particular occasion two of my colleagues, representing the Fine Gael Party, made eloquent speeches in support of my motion to refer the Vote back, but when the division bells rang they smoked with a Fianna Fáil Deputy outside, and they prevented my motion being carried by their deliberate decision not to take part in the division.

Mr. O'Rourke: Shame.

Mr. Dillon: Why not give the names?"

Deputy Davin is not on the Labour Benches at present. I wish he was. He is one of those men who always runs away. This is not the first time he has done so. I tell him that, coming as I do, from Leix-Offaly.

An Ceann Comhairle

Is the Deputy still purporting to quote from the Official Debates?

Mr. Finlay

Yes. The report continues:—

"Mr. Davin: If the three Deputies who spoke on that occasion had supported their speeches by their votes, my motion would be carried by a majority of one, and the Minister would have been compelled to pay these men 28/- or tender his resignation.

Mr. Dillon: Name them.

Mr. Davin: Deputies O'Higgins, Finlay and Donnelly."

I was very glad to learn that Deputy Davin made that statement. It is a false statement. Deputies on the Labour Benches need not laugh. I wish to contradict that statement.

An Ceann Comhairle

Does that refer to a debate of last year?

Mr. Finlay

It refers to the 7th of April, this year. Deputy Davin comes in here barking and howling. He is a howler and a barker and nothing else.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy must resume his seat.

The Deputy resumed his seat.

Mr. Keyes

After the enlightening shafts that we had from such an expert as Deputy Anthony, much does not remain to be said on this Estimate. This expert regretted the abysmal ignorance of all those who had spoken earlier on the Estimates and differed widely from his colleague. Deputy Dowdall; so much so that apparently no one dare say that anything could possibly be wrong with the Department which is dealing with forestry. The Deputy who has just sat down gave us forestry in abundance. I am sure that after his eloquent peroration members of the House know as much about forestry now as will do them for the next twelve months.

I agree with many of the strictures which have come from all parts of the House as to the way in which the Department of Lands is dealing with this question. The Department, unlike the representatives of the country, does not seem to regard forestry as a question of national reconstruction, or to take it seriously. That is eloquently borne out by the fact that we have a reduction in the Estimate at a time when those who regard this as an important national question would be expecting that the tendency would be in the other direction.

Questions have been asked by Deputy Roddy, Deputy Dowdall and others as to acreage available for forestry. I think that, in addition, we should have information as to the amount of land that is unsuitable for division for tillage and agricultural purposes generally and the amount that the experts in the Department consider that it would be wise and useful to have planted. I find that in the County Limerick there is one particular area there which cannot be held to be sand-swept or exposed to coastal winds and, consequently, is considered worthy of being planted by the Department. But I was told by the late head of the Department that I should not look for forestry schemes in the County Limerick because, he said, the land there is too rich to be used for afforestation purposes. When I made representations to have some afforestation work done in the west of the county they were turned down because it was said the land was too poor. To use a vulgarism the Department wants jam on it. Their attitude seems to be "We will take land gilt-edged to produce the maximum timber in the minimum time", but can we afford the luxury of playing up to the fancies of those experts of the Forestry Department? We have not available the millions of acres necessary for that purpose, so I think we should experiment and take a chance on it. There are places in East Limerick where plenty of good timber has been grown, and the tree trunks and stumps are there as evidence of it. The area has been visited by one of the forestry inspectors within the past couple of years. I have gone to the trouble of getting hundreds of acres offered voluntarily by the owners, but when the expert came down he decided that the place could not grow timber. How did the timber grow before the Department of Lands and Forestry took charge at all? Deputy Kennedy said he should like to see more hard woods grown. I suggest that there is room for the two schools of thought, the one which recommends soft woods and the one which recommends hard woods.

I have not had very much experience of forestry, but I had sufficient evidence during the couple of years I was purchasing timber in this country that there has been grown here some of the finest resinous and non-resinous wood that could be found in any country, Montana pine, larch, Scotch fir, and spruce, apart from ash and oak and beech. Montana pine is a pretty rare wood to have grown in this country. I remember speaking to a representative of the firm which was cutting it down, and he said that if he was doing the same thing in his own country he would be put to jail, because there was no question of replanting. Some of the places I have in mind are still as bare as they were when the cutting operations were finished. In East Limerick, where hundreds of acres were offered to the Department, they have all been rejected. It is vitally necessary that trees should be planted in those places, in order to supply shelter, and preserve and encourage agriculture in the area. Adjacent to those low-lying lands are hillsides on which there are tree trunks which serve as evidence that those places were able to grow both hard and soft woods, and still they are rejected by the Forestry Department.

I think every Deputy in this House would desire to see an increase in the acreage of forestry, but how can that be achieved if the Department persists in its present attitude? Deputy Anthony said that the Department officials will plant as much as the Minister tells them. I do not think I am going to accuse the Minister to that extent. I do not think I would accuse him of being a person who says to his experts: "You will not plant more than so and so." I myself believe that a wrong line of thought has been adopted in the Department generally, and each year we do exactly the same as was done last year. There does not seem to be any development, or any new outlook. As I have said already, the Department seems to want a guarantee in advance that they are going to get the maximum amount of magnificent timber in the minimum number of years. I would suggest to the Minister that if forestry is to be treated with due regard to the important place it holds in this country, there has got to be a change of outlook by the experts and by the officials generally, and by the Minister himself. It has been suggested to-night by some of the Deputies that in addition to the 300 acres we ought to be able to fit in smaller areas adjacent to that. I myself think that we should be able to do with something less than 300 acres, provided that we can get small lots in the immediate vicinity.

I certainly would ask the Minister to make careful inquiries from his experts as to what reasons they can advance for alleging that places on which there are tree stumps, as evidence of considerable growths in the past, are not capable of growing timber at the present time. I can produce evidence in regard to some of the places I have in mind. Deputy Corry mentioned some of them last night, and I am sure that every Deputy can point to places in his area where a considerable amount of useful timber was grown in the past, and which are now held to be useless for forestry purposes. I do not know whether it is the march of science which convinces us that we cannot grow timber in those places, or perhaps it is true, as expressed last night by Deputy Dowdall, that we have an inferiority complex in that regard. The matter should be carefully looked into, and there should be a wider adoption by the Department of the general opinion held throughout the country that forestry operations should be extended. I trust that, by this time twelve months, instead of a reduction in those activities we will have an increase. I am sure the Minister and his Department will have the support of all Parties in this House if they can show an expansion in the matter of forestry development, which is of considerable national importance.

Mr. F.H. Crowley

As this debate has been rather long drawn-out, I do not wish to detain the House very much longer, but I feel so deeply on this subject that I am forced to speak. I quite agree with Deputy Keyes in his viewpoint that the experts of the Department seem to be rather hard and fast about the quality of the land which is suitable for growing trees. It seems rather strange that we in this country are the exception to any race of people in Europe. Every country in Europe seems to be increasing the acreage under forestry, while we are just marking time. I admit that the Minister has acquired a certain amount of land in the past four or five years, but to all intents and purposes there has not been any advance from the point of view of plantation. If wood were taking a backward place in industry, if it were being ousted by substitutes, I would say that we need not pay any serious attention to wood, but the fact of the matter is that wood is taking a very important part in industry, a more important part than it did ten or 11 years ago. The number of articles made from wood, wood-pulp and cellulose is increasing by leaps and bounds.

I think it would be true to say that a large part of our dictionary at the present time is composed of the names of articles made from wood and wood substances. That shows the importance which must be attached to the matter of forestry. I hold that the present is the most opportune time for development. It is opportune, in the first place, because the Government is giving very serious attention to reclamation, and you cannot isolate reclamation from forestry; the two go hand in hand. Along the foot of the mountains and in the marshy areas you have got to get a reclamation scheme first and a forestry scheme afterwards. For that reason I think that when the Government are undertaking reclamation they should dovetail it with forestry. The other reason why I suggest that the time is opportune is that many of the areas which are suitable for planting coincide with the areas where there is a fair percentage of unemployed. We have almost reached the end of our tether from the point of view of making roads, drains, and so on in the line of minor relief schemes in our efforts to absorb the unemployed in the rural areas. I suggest that the best way of absorbing the unemployed in areas which are suitable for tree planting is by a forestry scheme. I would also suggest to the Minister that, considering the fact that it takes 30 or 40 years before trees mature, rates should not be charged on the land while it is not producing any benefit for the proprietor. I make a very strong plea for that, because I think it is one of the factors which are telling very much against forestry schemes carried out by private individuals apart from forestry schemes carried out by the State.

Again, I make a very earnest plea to the Minister that the time is opportune to migrate a number of farmers who have holdings on large stretches of land at the foot of the hills and running into bogs—perhaps not exactly bogs, but very poor areas at least— and make these large stretches of land available for forestry purposes. I mention that point because we are now reaching the end of land division, and if you do not take this opportunity to acquire land for forestry purposes, there will be great difficulty in acquiring it in five or ten years' time on account of the legal difficulties that will arise. I agree with Deputy Keyes that a block of 300 acres is rather large. If the Minister could agree to four or five links in a chain, so to speak, of 50 or 60 acres and then hopping over to another 50 or 60 acres, and so on, I do not see what difficulty there would be in linking them up until you reach the figure of 300 acres.

I shall conclude by making an earnest plea for the planting of large tracts with forestry and also creating shelter belts in exposed townlands and along bleak and barren roads. Some people who travel in the West and certain parts of the country know what it is to travel along a bleak, shelterless and windswept countryside, and I think that, in acquiring land, provision might be made for shelter belts along such roads. I do not want to sit down without supporting Deputy Dowdall's plea for a forestry society. Certainly, I must say that I have been surprised at the general lack of knowledge of forestry, and I think that the only way to arouse interest in the matter is by starting a forestry society and thus creating discussion.

Mr. McGovern

Like most of the Deputies who have spoken, I am not very satisfied with the progress that has been made in forestry in this country. Having regard to the backward and denuded condition of this country, owing to the spoliation that took place at certain times in the past, without much regard to the wealth of this country, the condition of the country is very bad from the point of view of afforestation. Another thing is that the schemes that are in operation are unsuitable for certain districts and counties where suitable schemes are most necessary. For instance, this scheme of finding 300 acres contiguous, so to speak, simply means that in counties such as Cavan and Leitrim, where you have a large number of small farmers, there will be no planting done at all, and yet these are the very places where afforestation is most necessary. This question has been dealt with from two angles, principally, by previous speakers: one, the advantage afforestation gives in the way of providing employment, and, secondly, the commercial value of the timber when grown, which will take a long term of from 30 to 60 years, according to the nature of the land and the class of the timber grown. As between these two extremes, however, there are other advantages not less important—in fact. I should say, more important—and among these are the beneficial effect on the climate of our country, the value of shelter belts, and—a not unimportant matter, in certain districts —the effect upon the scenery of the country.

These are three advantages which, I am afraid, have been lost sight of, although they have been highly and deservedly praised by Deputy Anthony. I am not sure that Deputies have given full consideration to these other points. For instance, we have the greatest and the most beautiful river in the British Isles—I think it is the greatest —the Shannon. I do not know how it stands, from the point of view of forestry, along its main shores—I think it is fairly well provided for—but I think the Minister, who I am sure is proud, as every Roscommon man is proud, of that river, would be ashamed that at the end of at least 20 years of a native Government, this river——

Dr. Tubridy

Should not the Deputy, Sir, be ashamed to refer to this country as part of the British Isles?

Mr. McGovern

Looking at it from my point of view, I think the Minister would be ashamed to bring a person from an outside country and let him see the river as it is there, because there is not a canopy over its cradle. Yet there is no doubt that that district is endowed by nature with every advantage from the point of view of scenic beauty, and would be about the most beautiful scenery in Ireland if the people had done their part the same as Nature has done hers. The river is rising in a plateau in the midst of the mountains, above a beautiful lake —Lough Allen—and yet nothing has been done to improve this scenery, which so lends itself to improvement. Then, upon the other side of the river, there is no scenery in Ireland to surpass it, I am sure. You have a valley there in West Cavan of about ten miles, with mountains abounding on each side, all studded with small lakes. There are 30 or 40 lakes from the ridge of the mountain, and if there were a proper forestry scheme there, you would have some of the most beautiful scenery in the country, which would be a great attraction for tourists.

I am not pretending that it would be a great success immediately, or that you would have the maximum production of timber in the minimum of time, but having regard to the value of shelter belts and the advantages from the point of view of scenery, as well as the relief that would be given to the people who are unemployed in that district—it is a very poor district, like a Gaeltacht district—I think the Minister would be well advised to consider some scheme that would be suitable for that part of the country. I have been referring to West Cavan but I do not want to pass over other parts of the county. I think that the Minister should extend these schemes to West Cavan and other parts of that county, and I hope he will give careful consideration to the matters I have mentioned.

Dr. Tubridy

Before I speak on the subject of afforestation, Sir, perhaps you will allow me to say that I object strenuously to the remark made by the last speaker in referring to this country as being portion of the British Isles. I am not a bit squeamish on the matter, but I think it is time that Deputies here should refrain from referring to this country as being attached to the British Isles. It may have been attached to the British Isles at one time, but I think that this country should now be given its proper name.

Mr. McGowan

As a British Dominion?

Mr. Hogan

Break the connection!

Dr. Tubridy

Well, perhaps Deputy McGowan and Deputy Hogan wish to agree with Deputy McGovern, but I certainly object to constant references to this country as being portion of the British Isles. I do object to this constant reference to this country as being portion of the British Isles. Deputies to-night have been apologetic for delaying the House and the Minister in connection with this Vote. I do not intend to take up that attitude. I am not at all apologetic in the matter. This Vote should have been discussed much more fully than it has been, and I think that Deputies should have taken the question of reafforestation much more seriously than they have done. I have listened to all the speakers in this debate and I must congratulate Deputy Crowley, who made the most constructive speech, and also Deputy Keyes. Deputy Dowdall gave a lot of information from the book he was referring to last night, which I myself have read.

My feeling about the general policy of re-afforestation is that unemployment should come under this Vote, and that the moneys allocated now for unemployment, which are being squandered in some areas on useless piers and roads, should be spent on re-afforestation. I also think that roads going where bogs have been cut away should be extended to help the re-afforestation scheme of the Government. I did hope at one time that, according as a bog was cut away, the area would be planted, and that in these bog areas, where there is most unemployment, and where money is being spent by the Office of Public Works on employment schemes, the money now being spent in some cases in a very undesirable way would be spent first of all in building roads to the bogs, and secondly, as the bogs were cut away, in having those areas enclosed and made fit for re-afforestation so that we would have a settled scheme for the relief of unemployment and, at the same time, help re-afforestation. Apparently, that scheme does not fall in with the views of the experts consulted by the Government in connection with re-afforestation.

A Government expert has been described as a man who is called in to tell a Government that a thing is impossible if they do not want to do it. That is a very good definition. A Government expert apparently came to my constituency and advised the Government that re-afforestation was not feasible in that area. I could have shown that official or expert and the Minister or anybody else concerned a number of plantations in that area very successfully planted by certain people, some of them English people who had hunting and fishing lodges there. I cannot see why if trees can be grown in places like Kylemore, Camus, Screebe, Derrynea, Spiddal, and Ballynahinch, they cannot be planted successfully throughout the western Gaeltacht. I hold that if they were planted there we would get a good return for the money expended, and that the money could be far better expended on planting in that way than giving it out in doles. There are areas there which it is stated are not able to produce trees. I have seen trees grown there by people who are interested in their production, and I do not believe in the report of the expert sent down there, who reported back to the Minister that the place was not fit to grow trees, and I have good reasons for not believing it.

In that connection, I must say that Deputy Mongáin gave a very good account of what happened in his district in a place called Knockboy. That was the one experiment in reafforestation undertaken by the British Government, and it failed very badly. Every expert or official sent down either by the present Government or the previous Government was handed the report made on the failure of the reafforestation scheme in Knockboy, and, when they read that report, they said to themselves: "If that has been a failure, I am not going to put my foot in it, and I am going to report that that part of the country is not fit to grow trees." What happened in the case of Knockboy? Thousands of pounds were spent by the British Government in an experimental scheme to grow trees in the West of Ireland. The young trees when they arrived were left lying on the quay at Kilkerrin for several weeks. Anyone who knows anything about trees knows that when young trees are exposed to salt water for two or three weeks they are no use afterwards. Notwithstanding that, the phlegmatic, dogmatic, positive officials that we always have proceeded to plant these trees. The fact is that the trees were all dead before they were planted. They were a fortnight or three weeks lying at the quay at Kilkerrin exposed to salt water and other elements. They were carted ten miles there in an ordinary horse and cart and left exposed there in frosty weather. When they failed to grow, we were told that trees would not grow in that district. But, extraordinary to relate, in that same plantation apple trees have been grown since, and there is a factory there for manufacturing jam.

I want to explode once and for all the fallacy started by this Knockboy scheme and to tell the Minister and anybody else concerned that this scheme, started by the British Government and destroyed by its officials, was not a failure owing to the unsuitability of the land, but was wholly due to the incompetency of the people dealing with it. We have heard a lot about the unsuitability of the land there, the lack of shelter and the poor soil. Any man with ordinary intelligence who went round to see whether trees could be grown in the west, could see that the reasons we have been given by the Minister do not hold.

I move to report progress.

Progress reported; Committee to sit again on Wednesday next.

The Dáil adjourned at 10.30 p.m. until 3 p.m. on Wednesday, 11th May.

Dáil Éireann debate - Thursday, 5 May 1938

Vote 55—Forestry (Resumed).

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 5 May 1938