asked the Minister for Lands if he is aware that smallholders in the area object to the proposed use of Rossroe mountain lands, Cashel, County Galway for afforestation purposes; and the action he proposes to take in the matter.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - County Galway Lands.
24.
(Cavan): I am aware that some tenants in the area have sought the division for grazing and turbary of lands held by the Forest and Wildlife Service of my Department at Rossroe.
Turbary rights are already provided on the lands for more than 80 local people. The grazing potential of the remainder of the land is low. In all the circumstances it is proposed to utilise the lands for afforestation—the purpose for which they were acquired.
Would the Minister reconsider his decision in this matter? Would he not agree that the Department are flouting the wishes of a very substantial number of very smallholders in an area where grazing land is very scarce? Would the Minister further agree that since his Department acquired these lands, the economics of grazing on lands such as these have changed dramatically and that this is primarily the reason that local smallholders now want to hold on to this mountain land for grazing purposes? Has the Minister, in his Department, a statement signed by several of these smallholders forwarded by me to his Department some time ago indicating their dissatisfaction?
(Cavan): I am advised by the Land Commission that the grazing value of the area is minimal. The only offer received for a grazing letting of 300 acres for six months up to 31st December 1975 was £12. According to reports, the land is dangerous for stock. I understand also that, at the time when the lands were allocated by the Land Commission for forestry purposes, a canvass was carried out by the Land Commission's local inspectors; local tenants were not, in the main, enthusiastic about taking turbary in the area and a cross-section of them indicated that they would welcome forestry in the district. I should tell the Deputy that, where land is reasonably suitable for Land Commission purposes, that is, for agriculture, it is the policy of my Department to leave it with the Land Commission. On the other hand, as in this case, where land is unsuitable and, I am told, dangerous for stock, the proper policy is, firstly, to plant, to keep up the planting progress and, secondly, to maintain employment.
Is the Minister aware that local opinion differs from that expressed by him through his Department; that local people deny they were approached by the Land Commission for the lands, had any knowledge that the land could be made available to them or were canvassed as to their views on the matter? There is a lot of contradiction in the whole story which led to the Department insisting on continuing with its decision on afforestation. In view of local dissatisfaction——
Order. Might I ask the Deputy to be brief with his supplementaries? These are very long supplementaries.
It is a long, tedious and complicated problem.
The Deputy knows the matter cannot be debated here at Question Time.
In view of the contradictions between what the Department and local people say, might I ask the Minister if he would make one final move to have local people canvassed on their views on this matter?
(Cavan): I am sure the Deputy is not suggesting—and I am not suggesting that he is—that the Land Commission inspectors have misled me or the Land Commission. They carried out a canvass in 1973, as recently as that. The result of the canvass has been given by me—to the effect that a cross-section of the people concerned were prepared to accept forestry and did not show any interest.
That is challenged.
Sorry, I am calling the next question.
Might I ask the Minister, in view of the objections of these smallholders, poor people, if he would have a final canvass carried out now before he proceeds with afforestation?
(Cavan): As the Deputy knows, when the Land Commission decide that land is not suitable for their purposes, they offer it to the Forestry Division and in this case they have conveyed it to the Forestry Division.
1973 economics have changed in regard to farming.
(Cavan): I admit that farm prices are better and far more valuable. I will convey the Deputy's views to the Land Commission. If they consider that they should have another look at it, I am sure they will.