Dáil Éireann Debate, Wednesday - 30 November 2016
6. Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine his views on whether farmers engaged in forestry may be harvesting trees too early based on market considerations rather than best forestry practice; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [37726/16]
View answerThe Woodland League has informed me it is aware of information and evidence to suggest that farmers and others involved in forestry are cutting down trees too early, at 25 years rather than 35 to 50 years, which is best forestry practice. They are doing so because of market and price considerations rather than best forestry practice. This has very serious implications for our hopes and those of the Government that forestry will play an important role in carbon sequestration.
The age at which it is best to harvest a forest depends on many things, including volume production, the risk of wind blow, sawmill requirements regarding log sizes and current market prices. Forest owners may wish to fell early, delay felling or in some cases not fell at all for their own reasons. The Department and Teagasc provide guidance to landowners on the timing of harvesting their plantations. What is of utmost importance for the Department is to ensure, through the felling licence system, that the felling and replanting is carried out in a manner that accords with sustainable forest management principles.
Rotation length is defined as the length of time between planting the trees and clear felling the final forest. There are many factors that impact on the rotation length such as species, site productivity, thinning regime, market requirements and site constraints. In addition, forests located in exposed areas may suffer from the effects of windblow resulting in the earlier harvesting of plantations. In 2014, Storm Darwin blew down more than 8,000 hectares of forest in the country.
Until recently, the majority of clear felling and replanting has been concentrated in the public estate. A significant portion of the private forest estate, particularly conifers, that were afforested in the 1980s and the early 1990s are now approaching a stage where forest owners are considering the best time to fell. In some cases forests will be thinned and in other cases clear felled, depending on the site's particular characteristics. Conifer species typically have rotations between 30 and 40 years of age, with broadleaved crops taking much longer, in some cases more than 100 years. Decisions made to clear fell crops are based on a variety of different reasons and to a large extent depend on the size of trees that the market will take. We have seen very productive stands of conifers growing to sizes suitable for sawmilling in less than 30 years.
The general principle of rotation length is to provide the optimum return to the grower, consistent with the principle of sustainable forest management. In some cases, the need to replace unproductive trees with a more productive crop or the early clear felling of trees susceptible to windblow may lead to a crop being felled earlier.
In February 2016, my Department invited tenders to assess the impact of forest felling age on overall financial return. The purpose of this work is to provide information to make growers and foresters aware of the possible impact of felling age on overall financial return. The results of this work will be made available in the coming weeks on the Department's website through a new interactive tool that allows forest owners and managers to assess the optimum felling age of their forest. The provision of this information will inform forest owners and managers on the appropriate felling age with a view to maximising the return on their investment and remaining consistent with the principle of sustainable forest management. It is vital that landowners have a positive experience from their forestry investments and that revenue from the first rotation facilitates reforestation to continue the forest cycle.
The Minister of State's reply is extremely worrying. He repeats again and again about the market, prices, financial return and so on. I am not saying those things are unimportant but there was not a single mention of the role of forestry in dealing with climate change and to act as a sink for carbon. The Government has signed the Paris Agreement. It has made commitments and rhetorical references to the important, substantial role forestry will play in all of this, yet what we hear is that, for market reasons, trees are being cut down too young. That is what I am hearing. The Minister of State is reinforcing that market conditions are determining this. Best forestry practice is that trees grow for 35 to 50 years. If we do not, as the Council for Forest Research and Development, COFORD, suggested, have a minimum of 10,000 additional hectares of forestry a year, and currently we are at 6,000 hectares, our forest estate will be a net emitter of carbon dioxide rather than a sink. If trees are being cut down early, as they are, for market reasons, our forest estate will not be playing the role it urgently needs to play in carbon sequestration.
I am a little bit mystified. The Department has €112 million a year committed to 2020 on an afforestation programme that seeks to go from 6,500 hectares, which is the correct figure, to 8,390 hectares. I do not know why that was the figure picked but that is the figure picked per annum. We hope, through certain measures, to be able to get to 7,000 hectares in the next 12 months. If the Deputy takes the current market situation, the impact of the Brexit decision on sterling has meant that prices into the UK, which is our biggest customer, have dropped by 20%. This has had a knock-on effect on the wood for standing timber for certain processors of 20% of the market price. Coupled with the fact that people can import timber from Scotland at a more competitive rate, there is no real commercial incentive to clear fell early. If the Deputy was up to speed with the current trends-----
Go raibh maith agat.
I am sorry.
I will give the Minister of State a minute.
If Deputy Boyd Barrett was up to speed with the current trends in research, climate change and efficiency, he would know that new developments in conifers allow us to produce varieties and species of conifer that can be rotated in 30 odd years and then replanted.
Minister of State, I have been more than fair to you.
It is important that the felling licence provision which includes a replanting obligation is maintained.
Minister of State, I gave you a minute the first time and then half a minute. We have to try to be disciplined to give everyone an opportunity.
Can I come in?
We are dealing with Other Questions.
I will be very brief.
Do I get another question?
It will be a short one.
If I had my way-----
Hold on. Standing Orders state that during Priority Questions only the person who tables the question can ask a supplementary question. During Other Questions, other Members may make a request.
I get a supplementary question as well. Is that correct?
I will be brief and I appreciate everyone's co-operation. I have a background in horticulture. If I had my way, many of those conifer trees would not be grown.
A question, please.
Many of these are pollutants. Anyone who looks at what comes down major drains from forests can see the goo and the green algae. It is shocking. My part of the country includes Roscommon and Galway. Deputy Kenny has spoken about something similar in Leitrim. We are being encouraged left, right and centre to promote forestry.
A question, please.
It will devastate our communities. I am a realist. I know some of the land is only fit for forestry. However, people involved in forestry are buying up good land. Our area is going to become no-go land.
A question, please.
What is the response of the Minister of State to the case I am making in terms of controlling this type of forestry, especially in the west and north west of the country?
The Minister of State can deal with both questions.
Moving to 8,000 ha still leaves us 2,000 ha short of what COFORD, the forestry research authority, has stated is the absolute minimum necessary for us to have real afforestation and for our forestry estate to be an effective carbon sink.
The Brexit problem simply highlights the need for diversification away from single species and so on. That we are vulnerable in that area too-----
A question, please.
Is there any consideration that market conditions are leading to us failing to deliver on our afforestation programme and its role in carbon mitigation?
The Minister of State can take both questions.
I have two divergent views before me.
There are three.
Indeed, there is a third view. There is much misinformation coming from both sides. I come from the county that has the highest percentage of forest coverage. It has not destroyed our community. We have large tracts of land planted for many years. It has sustained a rural economy.
Every plantation felled has to be replanted. That is an obligation. We have an afforestation programme.
What about new planting?
I do not know where Deputy Boyd Barrett is getting his figures. I will go back and check it with COFORD. As far as I am concerned, we have 11% cover in the country. Our target is to get to 18%. Let us consider the facts and figures behind the specifics in Roscommon and in Leitrim in particular. Last year, 82% of all plantations were undertaken by private owners. No companies were investing. There are reasons behind that, although that is not something I want to get into today. There is extensive misinformation. However, I will invite anyone to my part of the world to see the positive impact on the local economy that afforestation has had. We have 17.7% cover, the highest in the country.
