Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 3 May 1944

Vol. 93 No. 13

Committee on Finance. - Vote 53—Forestry (Resumed).

Sir John Esmonde

One always comes away from debates on the Forestry Department with one impression—that everybody is in favour of increasing the amount of land under timber and the amount of timber grown. That is about as far as we get. There is unanimity on this subject. It is interesting to compare the situation in this country with the situation in other countries. But we do not always make the proper comparisons. Yesterday, Norway, Sweden, Finland and Russia were mentioned by way of comparison. These are countries in which there were originally vast amounts of native timber. It had been growing there for centuries. A better comparison would be furnished by Holland and Denmark which often serve as comparisons in other matters. I have taken from the Planning Exhibition around the corner the figures for these countries. They may not be strictly accurate but I assume that they are approximately correct. They disclose an extraordinary state of affairs so far as this country is concerned. We all know, generally, what the physical and geographical characteristics of these countries are. These countries are flat countries, more or less surrounded by the sea. In Denmark, 9 per cent. of the soil is under timber, according to the figures which I obtained. In Holland, 6 per cent. is under timber and, in our own case, less than 1 per cent. I think that the exact percentage mentioned in our case by some Deputy was .3. That figure was, probably, taken from the statistical reports. That shows that our position is completely unsatisfactory and I think that we are all agreed that we must rectify matters as best we can.

The question is: Who will grow the timber and look after it? The Minister and his Department are the only people who can do that unless individuals to whom I shall presently refer are brought in. The private grower grows timber because he likes it and he has not any great inducement to grow it for the purpose of profit. When the Minister was introducing this Estimate, he said—I have not got his exact words—that, in order to be a paying proposition, State forests should be of sufficient extent to keep the cost of fencing, cultivation and supervision within economic limits. He went on to say that they would have to be of not less than certain dimensions. That is the position as regards the State, which goes on from generation to generation and which does not have to reap a profit within the lifetime of an individual. There is another advantage which, I think, the State has over the private individual in this connection. I do not know that the State contributes any sum corresponding with that which the private individual has to pay annually by way of income-tax on the land on which the timber is grown. I think that the State is exempt from the payment of income-tax. So that, in addition to the difficulties which the private individual has to contend with and which are common both to himself and the State, there is this burden of an annual tax upon the land.

The Minister will readily appreciate that no scheme is really worth while, from the point of view of the private individual, unless it covers a considerable extent of soil. That being so, if we are to conserve the timber resources of the country, it must be done on a national scale and we must not look to private individuals to provide any substantial quantities of native timber. Undoubtedly, a number of private individuals will go in for the planting of timber. Those will be divisible into two categories. In the first category will be those who start out to lay down new plantations and, in the second category, will be those who are bound under the law to replace old plantations which they have cut down. The Minister has referred to inducements. One inducement is an increase of the grant from £4 to £10 per acre. Notwithstanding the inducements, I do not think that we shall get under present circumstances the result which we all wish to see brought about. The question will come to this—that the State will have to carry the entire burden of conserving the timber supply of the country.

The Minister mentioned that there was a new Bill on the stocks. It would be of great interest to those concerned with afforestation if we could have a general outline of what is likely to be envisaged in connection with that Bill. Timber is a matter for long-time planning and we should like to know whether anything likely to affect the running of timber plantations is contemplated. I have here a very interesting little book on forestry which I turned up in the Library since this Estimate came before the House. It is one of the few books we have in the Library on this subject. It is by Mr. E. P. Stebbing, and it is entitled: The Forestry Question in Great Britain. It is a work I would recommend to all those interested in the possibility of forestry development. Page 47 gives an account of the development of the district of Landes, on the western coast of France, 100 years ago. I quote it because it illustrates the possibilities of forestry development in this country from the paying point of view. In this particular district in France, considerable economic benefit resulted to the community concerned by that development of forestry. With the permission of the House, I shall quote the paragraph of the book I refer to. It is a very well written book, and the paragraph is so clear and devoid of technicalities that everyone can understand it. Speaking of the development of forestry in England, it says, at page 47:—

"The above contention can be easily substantiated by a trip across the Channel and a study of any forest centre in France. The well-known case of the Landes on the western coast on the shores of the Bay of Biscay may be instanced. Something over a century ago this ribbon of country edging the sea consisted of shifting sand, sand dunes and malarious marshes, the sand being constantly being blown inland thereby covering up valuable agricultural lands and vineyards. The population was sparse, lived under the most miserable conditions and was racked by fevers. Chiefly with the object of arresting the march of the sand, the French Government commenced a forest in this region which now presents to view a great belt of forest of the maritime pine. The work, commenced at first as a purely protective one, has turned out an extraordinary financial success. A large and healthy population (for the marshes have been drained and fever has disappeared) is now entirely immersed in great industries; timber, resin (the pines are tapped) and paper pulp (the last the latest), the direct outcome of the afforestation schemes and most lucrative ones."

This I think is the most important part:

"For years ships have brought pit props from here to the Welsh mines and carried back therefrom, coal."

That refers, of course, to the war of 1914.

"Since the war we have been paying France well over £1,000,000 sterling, per annum, for the pit wood sent us from these regions..."

That alone indicates the financial benefit of forestry to a country. A study of that passage shows what can be done and illustrates the possibilities before us in this country too. Of course, one of the obstacles in our path is that we have not the facilities at the present time because of wartime conditions. But, certainly, there is a great future for forestry in this country and I trust that the Minister and his Department will see that the opportunity for development is availed of by the State and that something less will be expected from private individuals.

Mr. Corish

I would like to say a few words in connection with this matter. I agree with those who have indicated their dissatisfaction with the slow progress made by this particular Department. Before 1920 and 1921, when we were endeavouring to attain our freedom, one of the things held out to us was the extension of afforestation in this country. I want to suggest now that, considering the length of time we have been in a position to develop our own resources, comparatively little has been done. People in this country are not taking a sufficient interest in forestry. I would suggest to the Minister for Lands that, at an appropriate time in each year, his Department should get into touch with different local bodies all over the country. I believe that in that way a great deal of work could be done. Little or no interest is being taken by a great number of people who should take an interest in the matter.

Deputy Esmonde has referred to the production of pit props. I remember that during the last war a large number of pit props was sent over to Wales. In Wexford Town, a number of men were employed week after week, not only in cutting these pit props, but in loading them into steamers and schooners which brought them across the channel. I suppose that it is because of the fact that these are not available nowadays that this trade is not carried on. But, apart from pit props, various other things could be secured as a result of growing more timber.

I suggest that, if we had a certain type of timber, we would be able to produce wood pulp, and thereby relieve the paper supply situation. Everybody knows that we have had a paper shortage for the past two or three years. Some of the paper we have is not very good, but if the Minister and his Department paid particular attention to that aspect of afforestation, I feel that it would be of great benefit to the country.

Recently, the Department of Agriculture have been given a present of Johnstown Castle and demesne, a couple of miles outside Wexford, and I am wondering if the Minister has made any representations, or would he make representations to the Department of Agriculture, with a view to getting them to make available some of the land which is very suitable for three planting for forestry purposes. I would suggest that that should be done.

Some years ago, in consequence of local agitation in Wexford, the Forestry Department took over for planting the Forth area, two miles out side the town of Wexford. Some planting was done on that occasion, but for some reason it was discontinued, and there are still tracts of land which are useful for the purpose of planting. I would ask the Minister to request his Department to pay attention to that particular area. I would also like to ask the Minister what is the position regarding Camolin Park? My information is that not much work is being done there at the present, and I was wondering if there was any particular reason. I suggest that the Minister should get in touch with the local authorities at a particular time each year and invite their co-operation.

Mr. Cogan

I did not have an opportunity to hear the Minister yesterday, and I am, therefore, at a disadvantage in speaking in this debate. When the Minister is replying, I should like him to give us some indication of the intentions of his Department in regard to afforestation generally, and to tell us whether it is intended to speed up the rate of progress made during past years, or whether it is intended to slow it down generally. Public opinion demands a speeding up of the rate of progress. It is, however, not always desirable to draw comparisons between this country and other countries in regard to the amount of land used for afforestation. The actual percentage of forestry in other countries, as compared with ours, should not be the deciding factor, in our opinion. The deciding factor should be the actual value of forests to this country or rather to the creation of wealth and we should also consider whether land utilised for forestry will give a greater return than if it was utilised for any other purpose. In this respect, we have to consider, in respect of every acre of land acquired by the Forestry Department, what exactly it will cost for acquisition, planting, and overhead charges, and what return it will give when the timber has matured.

Last year I asked for information from the Minister. The Minister told me that the average cost of planting was £14 an acre, the cost of wiring the land, £3 an acre, and the overhead charges, £4, making a total cost of £21 an acre. It would be of interest if the Minister would give us the average value of the timber produced so that we could find out whether, on the average, afforestation has been economic or how far it has been profitable.

Wicklow, I may say, is one of the most extensively planted counties in Éire, and I think notwithstanding that there is, so far as the ordinary observer can ascertain, still wide room even in Wicklow for very considerable expansion of afforestation, but this House would like to have the detailed information to enable us to assess the value of timber production per acre when we have to compare it with the value of the same land used for agricultural purposes like sheep raising. We have also to consider the potential value of this land for sheep raising and agricultural purposes generally, if extensively developed and improved, as much rough grazing is capable of improving under modern systems of agriculture. It is not sufficient to go out and say to the Department of Forestry that such and such land is giving a very small agricultural return and has a very small agricultural value, and therefore ought to be taken up and acquired immediately for afforestation purposes. We must also consider the results which might accrue from the reclamation of such land and its utilisation for agricultural purposes. These are matters to which the Forestry Department and this House have to give great attention when considering the progress of afforestation in this country.

Might I say that I am still of opinion that there is a very wide field for advance and for the extension of the Forestry Department? There is also a considerable field for private enterprise, or rather for the carrying out of afforestation by private individuals and by local bodies. I welcome the fact that the Minister has provided additional inducements to private individuals and I hope that, with the general improvement in the economic condition of the farmers, they will avail themselves of the opportunities provided. But I must say that, so far as the individual farmer is concerned, afforestation is not pursued because of a profit-making motive. There is a desire on the part of the farmer to improve not only the appearance of his holding but its permanent value for posterity. It is only in times when the individual farmer is fairly prosperous that he can turn his attention to improvements of that kind. We must bear that in mind in considering the extent to which we can hope for improvement from the individual landowner.

There is also the question of encouraging local bodies such as parish councils, or any local co-operative body or society which may be established in rural areas to acquire small portions of land and to plant them. I hope that the Minister will look into the question of such bodies and give all facilities and assistance possible, and I ask him to facilitate them in the acquisition of small portions of waste land and to see that they get the assistance which is provided here for the private land owner. In this connection, a local body such as a parish council would not be inspired so much by the profit motive. They would be influenced largely by the motive of improving the district and generally giving a considerable amount of local employment and creating a local asset. That kind of local enterprise should be encouraged. Through the country, we see patches of two or three or four acres of land which could easily be acquired and planted but, for various reasons, the Forestry Department cannot touch it.

Some local bodies such as I suggest, whether co-operative societies or parish councils, with the best interests of the country at heart, should be encouraged to acquire such patches of land because in many cases the actual land involved is suitable for reclamation and for the planting of trees. The work of planting would entail a certain amount of grants so that the land would be made suitable.

There is one last matter which, I think, falls under the Minister's supervision — the checking up of our resources of timber suitable for firewood. Having regard to the very dangerous situation in which we are to-day in regard to fuel, it is absolutely essential that the resources of this country in timber suitable for firewood should be ascertained and, whether it is owned by the State or by private individuals, regarded as an iron ration on which the community could fall back if every other sort of fuel became unavailable.

Seosamh O Mongáin

Dá mbeadh an file beo faoi láthair a chum an t-amhrán sin "Cill Chais," déarfadh sé go raibh an ghlan-fhírinne agus údar caoine aige anois nuair a dubhairt sé:—

"Céard a dhéanfas muid feasta gan ádhmad

Tá deireadh na gcoillte ar lár..."

Gan aimhreas sin í an fhírinne—tá deireadh na gcoillte sa tír seo ar lár. Is gearr nach mbeidh údar fearsaid sníomhacháin sa tír, mar tá na coillte gearrtha uilig. Agus má bhfíor go gcaithfí coill a chur in áit na gcoilltí a gearrfaí; ach faraor níl sé sin á dhéanamh. I gceanntar an Rosa i gConamara bhí coill annsin agus gearradh le cupla bliain anuas í. Níl fágtha ach na buin. Bá cheart go gcuirfí iallach coill a chur ina háit seo. Ní fhéadfadh muintir na Foraoiseachta a rá nach bhfásfadh coillte anseo, mar chuir siad féin coill an taobh eile den bhóthar fiche bliain o shoin agus tá sí ag fás go háluinn. Níl idir an dá áit ach an bóthar. Mar sin ba cheart go gcuirfeadh an tAire iallach ar a dhream breathnú amach dó seo.

Deir siad nach bhfásann coillte i gConamara. Ach iné nuair a bhí an Teachta O Cinnéide as an Iarmhidhe ag caint, dubhairt sé go bhfaca sé bun sean-choillte i gConamara ag fás sna portaigh. Go dtí seo níor cheap mé go raibh an Teachta O Cinnéide i gConamara riamh. Tá an fhírinne ghlan aige—bhí an chuid is mó de Chonamara faoi choillte uair—agus tá mé ag ceapadh nach bhfuil athrú chó mór ar an líne ná ar an talamh le nach bhfásadh coillte anois ann chó maith is d'fhás siad sa tsean-aimsir. Sa Mám agus a leithéide d'áiteacha bhí coillte breaghtha ann le mo linn féin. Gearradh iad agus níor cuireadh blas ina n-áit. Tá go leor de na daoine anseo is ansiúd ag cur céad no dhó crainnte asta féin. Is ar éigin a loic ceann ar bith de na crainnte seo. Ní raibh scil ar bith ag na daoine a chuir na crainnte seo mar atá ag an dream atá foghlumtha sa bhforaoiseacht; agus má d'fhás siad do na daoine sin ba cheart go bhfásfadh siad a dhá oiread do na daoine atá ag leigean eolais ortha féin.

Tá cumann i gConamara a bhfuil Cumann na gCaiplíní ortha. Tugaimíd cúig dhuais do chuile phobal i gConamara do na daoine is deise a choinníos a dtithe agus a bhfeilmeacha beaga. Nuair a bhíos an scrúdú á dhéanamh, isé an riail atá ann go dtugaimaid fiche marc do dhaoine a chuireas céad crann. Tá go leor maitheasa déanta aige seo, mar tá go leor daoine ag cur crainnte féachaint an bhfuigheadh siad duais. An chuid is mó aca seo tá siad ag fás timpeall na dtithe. Teasbeánann sé seo go bhfásfadh crainnte i gConamara dá gcuirtí iad.

Tá mé cinnte o thárla gurb aon Aire amháin atá os cionn na Foraoiseachta agus na Gaeltachta go bhfuighe an Ghaeltacht níos mó freastail o mhuintir na Foraoiseachta ná mar d'fhághadh roimhe seo.

Mr. Heskin

I shall not delay the House unduly by the observations I have to make. I should like to urge upon the Minister that when lands are taken over for the purposes of forestry an investigation should be carried out in that locality to ascertain whether that land is unsuitable for tillage and fit for forestry. In the area from which I come, there is one farm of about 37 or 38 acres the owner of which, I believe, has applied very often to the Forestry Department to take over the lands. There are two further farms in regard to which applications were recently made, both to the Land Commission and the Forestry Department, with a view to securing the whole or part of the land for the purposes of tillage. This is land which, to my mind, is very suitable for tillage. In one holding there are about 220 acres, 150 of which at least would be suitable for tillage. A very small farmer with young sons in the locality applied for that land for the purpose of devoting it to the production of food, but now we find that it has been taken over by the Forestry Department. Only yesterday I discovered that another farm in the locality, where an abortive Land Commission sale was recently attempted, has also been taken over by the Forestry Department. Another farmer who applied for that land would have utilised it for the production of food rather than see it turned into a plantation. These are matters which I should like the Minister to consider. I have no objection to afforestation. On the contrary, I say the Government have not made sufficient progress with it. I think that everything should be done to promote forestry on a far more extensive scale than heretofore even by individual farmers and landowners. We all know that shelter belts are very desirable and that they help to improve the fertility of the land very considerably but, coming back to the point which I raised at the outset, I would suggest to the Minister that before land is taken over in any particular area due consideration should be given to the question of whether these lands are suitable for tillage and, if there are people in the locality who need that land and who would put it into production, I hope the Minister will give their claims favourable consideration.

Mr. Lynch

The matter raised by Deputy Heskin is the crux of this whole question. There seems to be a general view that land which is good for anything else, tillage or otherwise, must not be used for forestry, that in fact we should turn to the useless land, the mountain and the rock, and use that for forestry purposes. I do not know whether there is any basis for that view. I am not sufficiently familiar with the growing of trees to express any decided opinion upon it, but I think it is a question that deserves examination. I have the feeling that one would require nearly as good land for growing a tree as for growing anything else. If that is the position, we have to make up our minds on that very important matter of policy, as to whether we are going to devote a portion of our good land to afforestation or whether we are going to keep it for the production of other things to which we are more accustomed and that most of us think more important, such as potatoes, turnips and corn. That is the question we have to resolve because I doubt very much whether you can successfully grow trees to any extent on land that is good for nothing.

I know that experiments were carried out in many places, to some of which my friend, Deputy Mongan, referred and that they did not meet with any great success but, mind you, I would not accept the result of these experiments as final. As Deputy Mongan pointed out, the stumps of trees are there to this day to prove that woods flourished there in the past and it is incredible that, where woods once grew, they will not grow again. We have nothing to guide us as to whether the climate has changed so much in the years that have passed since the woods grew there originally, that the type of tree which grew there before would not grow there now. As regards the experiments that were carried out, I have seen the results of some of these experiments. They were mere skeletons, things that never developed into anything. The explanation given was that the Atlantic winds prevented the trees growing. I doubt that very much. I think something could be done to get over that by planting some type of shrubs in the first place as shelter belts for the trees. Eventually, by the selection of proper trees, you might find a type that would be suitable for these areas.

It is hard to believe that places which once grew trees have so altered that they are no longer capable of being used for afforestation. I think, above all, we have to make up our minds on the particular point that Deputy Heskin raised. Apparently, he is strongly of the opinion that, because a certain holding is suitable for tillage to his knowledge, it should not have been acquired by the Forestry Department. That is an important matter. That is a question of policy which is important, namely, whether it is advisable to utilise land which is suitable for the more ordinary agricultural purposes for purposes of afforestation. I have an open mind on the matter but I do feel that it is desirable that we should do something to have more trees planted and especially, if I may say so, I think it is desirable that we should have replanting done where the country is now being denuded of trees. I do not know whether that is being strictly enforced. I do not know if it is the job of the Forestry Department to see that where a tree is cut down a tree must be planted but I have very grave doubts as to whether it is being done.

As a result of the last war, large stumps were left all over the country. That is another matter that requires attention. They are an eyesore. Where a man has been given permission to cut down a belt of trees in any particular area, he ought to be made to clear out the stumps as well. There is nothing worse than to see on sloping ground throughout the country, in Kerry, Tipperary, Wicklow and other places, at a height of about two feet from the ground, stumps of trees dotted here and there like gravestones. If the Minister has any power in that matter, he should see that these stumps should be cleared out by whoever gets permission to cut down the wood. I do not know whether the replanting has to be done in the place where the trees are cut, but to my mind it would be impossible for young trees to develop if these roots are not taken up. The roots of these old trees have very wide ramifications and a young tree would not get very much chance of developing if it were planted amongst these old roots.

I know the Forestry Department cannot undertake to acquire small areas such as four, five and ten acre plots and to utilise them under their own forestry inspectors and forestry hands but, to develop the suggestion of Deputy Cogan, I think they might consider helping local authorities, or parish councils, or bodies of that kind, to acquire them. The Forestry Department might, under their compulsory powers, acquire them and hand them over to these bodies for development. These bodies might be willing enough to undertake work of that kind but they would usually be financially incapable of acquiring even a small portion of land for the purpose and everybody knows how the price of land will suddenly spring up if anybody wants it for a purpose of that kind. The Forestry Department would have powers of acquiring small belts of that kind where they were either offered or pointed out to them and if they could get some bodies or trustees even locally, without the formality of a parish council at all, to undertake the planting and the care of trees when planted in these areas I think they might be doing something worth while. It is throwing an extra burden on the Department but it is in line with what they are doing on a bigger scale in other places and I think it would not be too much of a burden.

With regard to tree planting generally by the private person, I think a good deal could be done in the way of propaganda, in the nature of what we used to do in the old days. The Minister will remember the Arbor Day, I think it was the 1st November in each year, which was an institution of the Sinn Féin movement. It was put up to everybody to plant a tree or a few young trees on that day. That was in itself very good propaganda. It got trees talked about. A good deal might be done for afforestation by getting people tree-minded, as it were, or forest-minded.

The main point that the Minister will have to face in dealing with this problem is the objection that Deputy Heskin raised. You will always find persons saying, "why should you waste good land which could be used for tillage for trees which you could grow anywhere?" People's minds ought to be made clear as to whether or not trees will grow anywhere. I do not think so myself. I think you require pretty good land to grow trees just as to grow crops. If I am right in that, people should be told about that so that they will not adopt the hostile attitude that they will otherwise constantly adopt when the Forestry Department acquires land which might be used for tillage.

Mr. O'Donovan

On the point that Deputy Lynch and Deputy Heskin referred to, I think there is no necessity to go into good arable land for tree planting while we have thousands and thousands of acres in the valleys and on the sides of hills which were under plantations in years gone by. I think it would be ridiculous at the moment to go into any land that is fit to produce crops and to utilise it for afforestation purposes.

The Forestry Department should not acquire them. I have never seen trees grow on rocks and poor land but I know various glens and hills sloping up 200 feet that were under timber in my time and that had been cleared during the 1914-1918 war. There are areas in West Cork about which I could give information—I am sure the Minister has particulars in his Department — Castletownshend, Lackareagh, and Cononagh. They are still bare. As Deputy Lynch says, the stumps of the trees are all that is to be seen. These places grew valuable and good timber. There is no private enterprise willing to take over and plant these areas. The objection that the Forestry Department have to taking them over is that they could not be worked economically, that the area is too small. The people who planted these areas in the past were the landlords who had their pound of flesh from the poor people. They planted in good lands and did not mind whether the land was valuable or not. I do not mind whether the areas are five, ten, 20 or 50-acre plots, the private individual cannot plant them. They are eyesores in the countryside and, whatever the economic aspect of it may be, I think it is the duty of the Forestry Department to take over and plant them. The difficulty is the repairing of the fencing. The private individuals who are planting small sheltered belts and doing a little bit year after year find it very difficult at the moment to fence. You cannot plant young trees unless you have fencing. I and others like me are held up because we cannot get the paling posts or the wire. We are at a standstill. Numbers of people who would plant small shelter belts and help to beautify the country are held up.

I do not know when a survey was made of the land in West Cork but, starting at Ardgroom and coming over the valley to Eyeries and Allihies, there is a big tract of country not suitable for tillage in any shape or form, but there is sufficient soil for timber. That land could grow valuable timber although it is not very much use for cattle feeding or for sheep. I think the people there would be very glad to have that land taken over by the Department and planted. It would save and beautify the countryside. It would be an asset in the future. Coming on to Castletownbere and Bantry there might be plots. The Minister should have a survey made in these areas and, as far as possible, acquire land, even if a little extra had to be paid for it. I do not believe in planting 500 or 1,000 acres but would prefer to see from 20 to 50-acre plots planted.

Mr. Moylan

It seems to be the habit in regard to the Department of Lands and Forestry to travel over a very wide area. I often wonder what the critics of the Forestry Department would do if they were deprived of the example of the Landes. When I am listening to people criticising the Forestry Department and telling us about its ineptitude and the lack of progress compared to what has been done in France. It seems to me that Deputy Esmonde is very ill-informed if it is only now he discovered that there was a book on forestry in the Library. That book has been there for many years. I wish Deputies would take some notice of what our own experts say, and of the publications of our own people in Ireland, and try to realise what the conditions are in Ireland, and why things that have been done in other countries cannot be done here.

As far as I know, one of the chief officers of the Land Commission, in a lecture delivered recently in Dublin, referred to this question, and it has been referred to time and again by various officials of the Department. A thorough explanation has been given why the planting of the Landes has been successful and why planting on the seaboard of Connemara and places like that is not successful. The question of erosion was raised by Deputy Hughes and he referred to the position in America. Deputy Crowley also referred to the American policy and the tremendous efforts put into forestry there during the last few years. I explained on the Estimate for the Department of Lands that, in regard to erosion, we in the Land Commission had taken certain action, particularly in regard to sand fixation in County Donegal. I saw the work done by the Land Commission in Donegal nine or ten years ago and was very much amazed at the methods utilised and surprised at the success that had been achieved. I became very interested, and, after reading an American magazine of a sand fixation project that had been undertaken on the coast of Oregon and Washington, I wrote to a friend of mine in America asking him to get from his State forester all the particulars he could regarding the work done in Oregon and Washington. The State forester sent me all the information available in Washington to the Federal Government. He wrote me a personal letter describing his own knowledge of sand fixation and erosion and told me that all the work was based on the findings of a man named A. H. McClean, of the Irish Land Commission, who was an acknowledged expert on the subject. He advised me to get in touch with Mr. McClean. I wish Deputies, instead of roaming over Denmark, Europe and America, would get in touch with people who, according to Deputy Kennedy, still operate the law of mortmain in regard to Ministers. Deputy Crowley also spoke about the tremendous amount of work being done in America. Undoubtedly there has been a great development of forestry in America, but the reasons underlying it were much different from the reasons here.

A French writer who is a very shrewd observer of social and economic phenomena charged some time ago that the American farmers had done more harm to America than the gangsters. Undoubtedly when I hear members of the Opposition and of the Farmers' Party talking about destruction of fertility in the land here through Government policy I remember what happened in America and what brought about the condition of things that is now being repaired by forestry. Continual cropping with the same type of crop completely destroyed a tremendous acreage of the Middle West and, in order to prevent that area from being turned completely into a desert, under the N.R.A., and irrespective of cost, President Roosevelt undertook to plant enormous belts there. We cannot do that. We have not the same problems; we have not the same land, and we are not empowered or able to spend the same amount of money. I never heard any Deputy—since we finally sold the idea to the Opposition—objecting for the past couple of years to the growing of wheat. The only objection to wheat growing on the part of Deputies, was to its being grown in their own constituencies. It is the same with forestry. Deputy O'Donovan, Deputy Cogan and every Deputy would like to see more forestry but immediately the Forestry Department takes over a piece of land in their areas they complain because it is not handed over to landless men and the Old I.R.A. That is all rubbish. You cannot have it both ways. It has not been the policy, and Deputy O'Donovan ought to know that it has not been the policy, to take over arable land.

Mr. O'Donovan

I did not say it was.

Mr. Moylan

The Forestry Department has been very humble in its demands and has been satisfied with a very poor type of land. It has even tried to grow trees on rocks. The Land Commission very definitely has not butted in on the good land but has tried to get the second-class land planted. Deputy Fitzgerald-Kenney was as lyrical as Joyce Kilmer in his description of the tree but I think we will be able to satisfy him as to what exactly a tree is so that if anybody goes out to buy an elephant they will not come back with an ash-tree. Deputy Crowley said that there were offers of land in Kerry and that they were turned down by the Land Commission. I sincerely hope the Deputy will carry out his promise and make a list of these lands and give us all the help possible in securing them because the only thing that is preventing planting is the lack of land. It is not that we are not forestry minded, as Deputy Crowley says. I dislike praising civil servants—it makes me suspect—but I think that in the Forestry Department we have the most earnest officials in regard to their business in the whole country. Deputy Crowley said that we were offered land in Kerry. If he had spoken about Mayo or Donegal I might not be quite au fait with the position but I know every blade of grass in the area Deputy Crowley spoke of. West, north and along the source of the Blackwater there have been negotiations going on for years and years between the Land Commission and the tenants. Every inducement has been offered to the people to give land that is cold, bare, desolate, that really should be planted. Every effort is being made by the Forestry Department to secure that land. Deputy Crowley tells us that he has secured an offer of land and one would think that it was a straightforward proposition. It is not. Kerry is, as it were, suspect with me.

Mr. F. Lynch

They have not much in Cork.

Mr. Moylan

If Deputy Crowley could get about 50 farmers from his constituency migrated up to County Kildare or County Meath or elsewhere then we could have the land for forestry, but we have not had the straightforward offer of forestry land in Kerry that Deputy Crowley mentioned. I am not in any way enamoured of the idea of getting local authorities or parish councils enthused about forestry. I do not think that that is a good proposition. Deputy Corish and Deputy Lynch, from two points of view spoke about 1920 and 1921 and what we did then. Deputy Lynch said that the planting of trees and an Arbor Day was very good propaganda for forestry. In my opinion it was very good propaganda for Sinn Féin and that was what it was meant to be. The results as regards forestry were nothing. Trustees, parish councils and local authorities are not satisfactory bodies for carrying on forestry. It is a job that must be done by the State. There is no other way of doing it, but I believe very much that it is worth doing and that it is worth making mistakes to try and secure success.

Deputy Hughes said that we hide our errors. We do not hide our errors. Other people say that we parade our errors in order to prove that forestry cannot be developed. I think it is a wise policy to tell people what the successes are and what the failures are, so that the people can judge exactly what the position is. The talk that there was about stumps in bogs and hillsides that have been there from time immemorial does not guarantee successful planting now. Again I will give you an instance. Quite recently, a friend of mine, who is now somewhere in the Pacific, wrote from somewhere in Australia to say that he was surprised to see "beech" trees in Australia that were some thousands of years old. He said that Australia had made various efforts to plant and propagate "beech" trees throughout the country and had failed because of a complete change in the climate of the country. The "beech" trees that originated some thousands of years ago are still there, dropping away gradually, but no new ones can be planted because of the change of climate. In the same way when you get stumps here it does not show you can grow trees at the present time. I will not say anything more. I think I said everything in making my opening statement, but I am quite confident that the Forestry Department is alive to its responsibilities. It is capable of handling the situation in a satisfactory fashion. I am anxious that we should pursue the development of forestry as strongly as possible and I would ask Deputies to co-operate with the Government and the Department in trying to secure the land on which to plant the trees.

Mr. A. Byrne (Jun.)

Has the Minister anything to say about the conditions of service for foresters?

Mr. Moylan

A few days ago I answered a number of questions put by Deputy Byrne in regard to that and yesterday I gave a detailed statement in regard to the land in reply to a question by Deputy Murphy. I am never proud of the wages paid to labourers in this country. I think they should be paid more, but Deputies will understand that a particular Department cannot act on its own in regard to its employees. In regard to the wages paid to forestry labourers, we have to take into consideration wages paid to agricultural labourers and others. The matter is being examined and I hope to be able to make a statement shortly.

Mr. Byrne (Jun.)

But I am speaking of foresters.

Mr. Moylan

I am speaking of foresters.

Vote put and agreed to.