The first section of this Bill is purely a definition section. The second section is one of the most important sections in the Bill. The principal Act referred to in the second section is the Forestry Act of 1919. Under that Act there were provided compulsory powers for the acquisition of land for the purposes of afforestation but the machinery for the exercise of these compulsory powers it appears was somewhat complicated and moreover there was no provision in the Act of 1919 to deal with two cases which time has shown it is essential to deal with. One of these, strange to say, is where there is no owner for the land. Deputies must remember that forestry land is often mountainous land and land of little agricultural value, and there have been cases, notably the Fort Mountain in Wexford, where it is almost quite impossible to decide who the owner of the land is, and some provision had to be inserted to meet some cases like that. Also some powers had to be taken to deal with grazing rights, turbary rights and easements. Forestry lands are usually in mountainous districts. The system in this country with regard to such lands is that they are held in common sometimes or in fee with commonage rights and turbary or with rights to grazing by the people in the district. Some of these original rights have lapsed and new rights have been created, and at this stage, with regard to very large areas of mountainous land in this country, it is quite impossible to decide accurately, or in a reasonable time, who is the owner of the rights of commonage and grazing. It is essential to get rid, once and for all, of these two difficulties if the Forestry Branch is to be put in a position to acquire sufficient land within a reasonable time for the purposes of afforestation. It is to meet these cases that Section 2 has been inserted in the Bill. It provides that an application shall be made to and heard and determined by the Irish Land Commission exclusive of the Judicial Commissioner.
Under the Forestry Act of 1919 application was to be made to the Development Commissioners, but the Development Commissioners are no longer in existence. Application has now to be made to the Land Commission. It is to be made first to the Commissioners, with an appeal to the Judicial Commissioner and with no appeal from him. The procedure is exactly the same as in the acquisition of lands by the Land Commission for the purposes of the relief of congestion. The powers taken here to acquire land for forestry purposes are practically identical with the powers to acquire land for the relief of congestion. This section sets out in sub-section (4):
"No such application shall be refused unless the Irish Land Commission, exclusive of the Judicial Commissioner or, on appeal, the Judicial Commissioner is of opinion that the land to which the application relates comes within the provisions of sub-section (2) of Section 7 of the Principal Act or it is required for the purpose of relieving congestion under the Land Purchase Acts."
In other words, the Forestry Branch or, rather, the Department of Agriculture, for the Forestry Branch is a branch of the Department of Agriculture, may acquire lands compulsorily for afforestation purposes unless the land is a home farm, demesne, town park, or one of the various other classes of land of little importance set out in that Act and that form exceptions to the law which allows the Land Commission to acquire land for the relief of congestion.
Sub-section (5) deals with the point which I just mentioned—that is the cases where the owner of the land cannot be definitely ascertained. Section 1 (5) sets out:—
"If the Irish Land Commission (exclusive of the Judicial Commissioner) or the Judicial Commissioner as the case may be, is satisfied that after diligent inquiry the owner of the land to which an application or appeal relates cannot be found or cannot be ascertained such application or appeal may, notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the said Section 7, be heard and determined in the absence of such owner."
That may seem an extraordinary provision, but the fact is that there are rather big forestry areas which we have been anxious to obtain, and of which it has become extremely difficult to decide the ownership. This is sometimes land that is of very little value for agricultural purposes, mountain land left for a long time derelict, grazed in common, and with certain turbary rights and the rights of grazing in favour of certain people in the neighbourhood. Under this provision the Land Commission may proceed to acquire land, and the rights of anybody will be preserved as against the purchase money which will be lodged in court.
Further on there is also provision to deal with the second point, namely, the extinguishment of easements, grazing rights and turbary rights. "An order made on such application... shall operate to distinguish as from the date of such order all grazing, turbary and other rights in the land to which such order relates subject to the payment by the Minister to the owner of such rights or compensation which shall in default of agreement be fixed under the Act of 1919."
That is to say, that these rights may be extinguished subject to compensation being paid under the Act of 1919, which is the appropriate Act for deciding the compensation in such cases. That is a fairly drastic provision. It is not as drastic as the provision which we had in the Land Acts. It is not quite as drastic as these provisions, which enable the Land Commission to acquire land compulsorily for the relief of congestion. At the same time it is a fairly drastic provision, but it is essential if a forestry programme, and a necessary programme which, I think, there is very little dispute about, is to be carried out. At any rate it is absolutely essential to provide some machinery by which any definite right can be extinguished subject to compensation. The procedure, of course, will be regulated. The procedure for making applications by the owners or would-be owners of such rights will be laid down by the Land Commission under the powers given them under sub-section 7 in the same way as they laid down the procedure for owners of easements or rights of any kind over land which is being acquired by the Land Commission for the relief of congestion.
The fact that the land is to be acquired is to be advertised locally in the papers. Due notice will be given in the official gazette and in the daily and weekly local papers to the effect that anybody who claims to have rights over these lands may bring forward his claims and prove them before the Land Commission or the Judicial Commissioner within a certain time and make arrangements about fees and the distribution and lodgment of the purchase money in court, in the event of there being any difficulty in deciding who is entitled to the money or to any part of it.
The third section is quite simple, and speaks for itself. It is necessary in the event of lands which are subject to a Land Commission annuity being acquired to apportion the annuities over various parts of the lands. The fourth section is also a drastic section. It sets out that no tree or trees may be cut down without a licence except a tree that is uprooted for the purpose of transplanting; a tree growing or standing in a county borough or urban county district—that is a city or town —a tree growing or standing within 100 feet of any building occupied as a dwelling-house, or used for housing domestic animals; if a tree shows signs of falling over a house it may be absolutely essential to cut it without waiting two, three or four days to get a licence; or unless such tree is cut down under Section 34 of the Local Government Act, 1925, which gives powers to cut trees on the roadside, or Section 98 of the Electricity (Supply) Act, of 1927—for the erection of poles and standards for the Shannon scheme —unless "such tree is not necessary for the ornament or protection of the holding upon which it stands, and is cut down with the intention of using the timber thereof for the construction or repair of buildings, fences or other structures on the said holding." In this connection I would draw attention to the fact that Section 32 of the Irish Land Act of 1909 is repealed in the Schedule and Section 3, sub-section (3) of the Land Act of 1927. These two sections are the ones which deal with trees growing on land subject to a land purchase annuity, and the Act of 1927 sets out that no such tree that has value as ornamental timber or as a shelter bed can be cut down without the consent of the Land Commission.
This goes a step further in two directions. If you like, it goes two steps. First of all, it applies this prohibition to all land, whether subject to land purchase annuities or fee-simple lands not subject to land purchase annuities. So far as the exception mentioned in sub-section (F) is concerned, it is also dealt with in the Act of 1927, which provides that even trees which are not ornamental or required for shelter may not be cut down unless they are required for use on the holding for repairs. The position is, if this section be passed, that no tree or trees on any land, fee-simple land free from all charges, or lands subject to a land purchase annuity, or tenanted land, may be cut down with a few unimportant exceptions, except on licence from the Minister for Agriculture. The Bill also transfers the power of giving licences from the Land Commission, as set out in the Act of 1927, and previously in the Act of 1909, to the Department of Agriculture. That is a very drastic section. There is no doubt about that, but the question is: Is it necessary, and is there any better way of dealing with the situation? It is really meant to prevent the country being denuded of its woods. The problem in our minds when we considered the section was not the case of a farmer cutting one tree on his land. What we really want to look after is the case of woods of 15, 20, 100 or 200 acres being cut down, and I do not see any way of dealing with that situation except by such a section as this. If you try to draw a distinction between two, three or four trees and a wood you are up against almost impossible difficulties in drafting, as to when a number of trees become a wood, when they cease to be a wood and so on. I see no way of giving the Department of Agriculture sufficient powers to stop the wholesale cutting down of woods throughout the country except by giving the powers to the Minister—really to the Department of Agriculture—to prohibit the felling of any trees, with these few trivial exceptions, except under licence.
The next section deals with the method of giving licences:—
"The Minister may, if he so thinks fit, grant to any person a licence in the prescribed form to cut down or uproot any trees specified in such licence.
"Every application for a licence under this section shall be in the prescribed form and shall contain the prescribed particulars.
"A licence granted under this section shall operate to relieve in respect of every tree mentioned therein the licensee and any person authorised by him from any prohibition against cutting down or uprooting and so on.
"A licence granted under this sec- tion may, if the Minister so thinks fit, contain a condition that the licensee shall, within a specified time after cutting down or uprooting a tree under the licence, plant one or more trees of a specified kind on the holding...."
I imagine that, even in the minds of people who own woods and forests, there is not very much hesitation about giving such a power to the Department of Agriculture, but that what would really occur to people on these two sections is: How are these powers going to be administered? First of all, remember that Section 5 says:
The Minister may, if he so thinks fit, grant to any person a licence in the prescribed form to cut down or uproot any tree specified in such licence.
I can imagine a man who has three or four different forests, who has been planting trees and cutting them as they are mature, selling them for commercial purposes. He is, of course, carrying out an absolutely legitimate transaction, but the sort of man who plants trees on his own land, cuts them down when mature, and re-plants, the first question he asks is: "How am I to get a licence to cut these trees? Have I to count all the trees in the wood, and send an application to the Department of Agriculture asking them for a special licence for each tree? When I get the licence, how long will it last, and so on?" I am advised legally that as the section stands it would cover a licence of this sort. Such an owner would apply to the Department of Agriculture for a licence to cut trees growing on an area marked in red on the map accompanying, and it would be open to the Department to send back the licence in that form. Similarly it would be open to the Department, if they thought it right so to do, to make a condition that trees shall again be planted on such area marked red on such map.