I propose to take Questions Nos. 488, 489, 491 and 492 together.
There were many discussions with environmental consultants, amongst others, at the time with clear advice around the Department moving to the implementation of the wider zone of influence. As previously outlined, the decision to move to the 15 km was based on a number of factors including the advice from environmental consultants, NPWS, feedback from the FAC and industry standards in other sectors.
Almost all applications for forestry licensing have at least one European site within 15 kilometres. However, what is important is what sites are screened in and what sites are screened out. Some projects may have many sites within 15 kilometres but the screening rules for the qualifying interests of those sites allows for those sites to be screened out and barring any other issue the file can be approved without an appropriate assessment. Most European sites within 15 kilometres of a forestry project are screened out due to the screening rules that apply. It is therefore not the buffer distance of 15 kilometres that screens sites in, it is the screening rules.
A significant amount of sites are screened in, not because of the 15 kilometre buffer but because of the compliance with European and National Case law in relation to the consideration of mitigation at screening stage. This is a legal requirement that has to be met and compliance with the law could not be suspended until additional resources were in place.
In relation to an examination with Northern Ireland, Scotland and other countries, I understand that a comparison of the licensing of forestry operations in other Countries will be carried out in the context of the work of Working Group 4 in Project Woodland.