Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Friday, 12 Apr 1946

Vol. 100 No. 15

Committee on Finance. - Vote 53—Forestry.

I move:—

That a sum not exceeding £215,120 be granted to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending the 31st day of March, 1947, for Salaries and Expenses in connection with Forestry (9 & 10 Geo. 5, c. 58, and No. 34 of 1928), including certain Grants-in-Aid.

In presenting the Estimates for the Forestry Services for 1946-47, I had hoped to be able to announce that certain difficulties affecting planting programmes during the war years had been overcome. Unfortunately I cannot do so. Despite widespread inquiries it was impossible to secure any supplies of rabbit netting last year. As a result, the planting programme fell to a figure of 3,500 acres, the same as was achieved as far back as 1930-31. Nevertheless during the six winters which have elapsed since 1939 we have been able to plant a total of 33,330 acres which, in the circumstances, is a creditable achievement.

I would like to be able to assure the House that next winter will see an appreciable improvement but up to now, although small quantities of barbed wire and of wire netting have been secured, we can get no guarantee for the delivery of the quantities required for a 10,000 acres planting which could be achieved if sufficient fencing materials were obtainable. Our reserves of that commodity are virtually exhausted.

The difficulties of the past few years in securing adequate supplies of seed for the re-stocking of the nurseries have not yet disappeared. It has not been possible to obtain the full quantities required from the United States, Canada or the Continent. In Great Britain certain varieties of seed that were normally to be obtained appear to be in such short supply that export is prohibited. To make up as far as possible for the shortage of imported seed, the collection of home grown seed has been pushed as vigorously as possible. A second seed kiln has been set up by the Forestry Division to deal with the extraction and cleaning of the native seed. The principal varieties collected were Oak, Beech, Sycamore, Chestnut, Japanese Larch, Scots Pine, Mountain Pine, Pinus Insignis and Pinus Contorta.

Deputies may wonder why the Department cannot obtain from its own and other native woodlands all the seed required. The collection of large quantities of suitable seed from our comparatively small and scattered woodlands is a difficult and expensive business. Certain varieties are not obtainable at all and quality is a prime consideration. It is of the utmost importance that seed should be taken from the best possible types of tree. The quality of the parent trees is reflected in the produce of their seed and few of our remaining trees of seed bearing age are perfect specimens of their kind. We are keeping in close touch with all possible sources of supply and it is possible that by next season there will be an improvement.

The net estimate for the current year represents an increase of £17,000 over the amount provided for 1945-'46. The increase is due to additional provision for staff and to a reduction in the receipts estimated from the scales of mature timber. The stocks of mature timber in the hands of the Forestry Division have been so heavily cut over during the past five years that little now remains to be put on the market. The amount provided for the purchase of land remains at the same figure as last year. There is a slightly better outlook as regards the possibilities of securing land for planting. A total of approximately 8,000 acres was acquired last year as against a total of 6,137 in the previous year and approximately 5,000 in the preceding year. This rate of acquisition is more than sufficient to replace the areas planted in the same years.

In dealing with the details under the different sub-heads of the Vote as set out in the printed estimates, I propose to refer only to items which show an appreciable difference from last year's figure, or which seem to call for special comment.

Sub-head A—Salaries, Wages and Allowances, £34,647. The increase required under this sub-head is to provide for the cost of the additional staffs to which I have referred already. Since the Estimates volume was printed, it has been decided to set up for the Forestry Division an accounts staff entirely separate from the staff dealing with the Land Commission accounts. The change involves, in the main, only a transfer of staff from the Land Commission accounts branch. The establishment of a separate accounts branch for the Forestry Division will enable the Department to produce, for the first time, accounts for the forestry service on a commercial basis and that task will be commenced this year.

Sub-head C (1)—Acquisition of Land —Grant-in-Aid, £25,000. The provision under this head has been maintained at the same figure as last year. In introducing last year's Estimates, I mentioned the difficulties which had been encountered in efforts to purchase land held in common by a number of persons. In the Forestry Bill, lately occupying the attention of the House, proposals have been made for simplifying the compulsory acquisition of such lands, but this is not to be taken as an indication that the Forestry Division intends to launch out upon a drastic scheme of compulsory purchases. Purchase by agreement is and will remain the normal and desirable course. Compulsion will be resorted to only in isolated cases such, for instance, as where a majority of persons concerned in the ownership or use of an area of land more fitted for planting than for any other use is willing to sell the interests at reasonable prices and the greed or obstinacy of one or two of the parties associated with the property stands in the way of the improved use of the land in the general interest.

It is anticipated that a balance of about £30,000 will be carried over in the Land Acquisition Fund from the year 1945-46 which, with the provision of £25,000 now requested, will make available for purchases during the year a sum of £55,000.

Subject to the completion of the usual legal formalities, the Forestry Division has agreed to purchase, from private landowners, at a cost of £25,196, areas totalling 9,169 acres and from the Land Commission areas amounting to 585 acres, at a cost of £1,624. In addition, negotiations are in an advanced stage for the purchase, from private owners, of about 4,239 acres, costing approximately £13,136. Negotiations are in progress for the purchase, from the Land Commission, of about 6,125 acres, valued tentatively at £21,270. In short, the probable purchases as foreseen at present amount to 9,755 acres and the possible purchases to 10,364. Some of the negotiations may never come to anything and others will take a considerable time before agreement is reached as to extent, boundaries and price, so that the sum of £55,000 will probably be sufficient to meet all payments that fall to be paid during this financial year.

Sub-head C (2)—Maintenance and Cultural Operations, £260,089. The provision required under this sub-head represents a slight increase upon the amount voted last year. It is based upon a planting programme of 6,000 acres, which it had been hoped to attain last year, but which could not be carried out, and even for next winter it is not at all certain that more than a small portion of this programme can be completed. Everything depends on the quantity of fencing materials secured during the next six months and, to a certain extent, upon the date at which it is secured. To prepare for a large planting programme, without an assurance that the required stocks of rabbit netting will be available, would involve the risk of wasting most of the expenditure involved, whilst on the other hand, the late arrival of supplies would not permit of the completion of the full programme.

For some years past, the Forestry Division has been carrying out a programme of road-making in the forests in order to facilitate the extraction of timber and poles from thinning. It is proposed to continue this work during the current year, and also to accelerate the work of thinning. Many of the earlier plantations laid down by the Department are now in urgent need of thinning. This work is of immense importance for the future of plantations, and must be done carefully and thoroughly, and though there is a limited local market for the produce, the disposal of all the poles thinned out may present a serious problem as the work expands.

The building up of increased nursery stocks in preparation for extended planting programmes in future years is being continued in spite of difficulties in procuring adequate supplies of seed. A change has been made in the form of the Estimate and nursery costs are now shown separately.

The Department now has 16 portable cross-cutting outfits for use in the preparation of firewood blocks from lengths of inferior timber. In view of recent pronouncements regarding the fuel situation, it seems probable that a demand for firewood in this form may be anticipated for many years to come and will provide a remunerative market for scrub and inferior timber which, in pre-war days, was practically unsaleable. The use of these outfits would be justified, even if the returns from the sale of the blocks showed only the smallest possible margin over the cost of conversion, as the inferior timber used for the purpose must be cut out in order to replant the ground with trees of a more valuable kind. Most of the firewood blocks turned out find a ready local trade, both for domestic use and for the firing of threshing engines. In some cases, where the local demand is not sufficient, the blocks are advertised for sale whenever a sufficient quantity has been accumulated, and are sold to the highest bidder subject, of course, to any limitations imposed by the maximum prices Orders. There has been a reduction in the provision under this heading, as the Forestry Division has now an adequate number of machines on hand for some time to come.

Sub-head D—Grants for Afforestation Purposes, £1,000. Applications for the grant of £10 an acre which, under certain conditions, the Department is prepared to pay to assist private owners to undertake the planting of trees on their own lands, continue to be received in increasing numbers, but no increase in the provision for the payment of these grants is likely to be required this year. Very little publicity has been given to this scheme in view of the difficulties which, unfortunately, still exist regarding supplies both of plants and of fencing materials, but when conditions return to normal this will be remedied, and I hope to see, not merely the replacement of woods cut down during the war, but a considerable extension of the woodlands and groves of trees on private lands. From the scenic point of view, more can be done in this way to improve the amenities of the country than can ever be achieved by the planting of large areas of mountain land by the State.

Sub-head E (2)—Exhibits at Shows, £75. In the main the provision now asked for is to defray the cost of a forestry exhibit at the forthcoming Spring Show of the Royal Dublin Society. This is a resumption of a pre-war practice and provides a valuable means of bringing to the notice of the public the regulations in regard to tree felling, the details of the grants payable etc. Smaller exhibits may also be provided at other agricultural shows throughout the country.

Sub-head H.—Appropriations-in-Aid, £46,140. It will be observed that a fall of £17,000 is anticipated in the revenue accounted for under this heading. This is due almost entirely to the fact that, as a result of the heavy fellings of both commercial and firewood timber for the past five or six years, the woods have been so cut over that quantities remaining for sale are both small in size, inferior in quality and in many cases difficult of access. Such a decrease had been expected last year but, in view of the desirability of getting to the market as much timber of building quality as possible, a number of additional lots were put up for sale which otherwise would have been held over till this year.

During the past year, about 73 large lots of timber, comprising 59,408 trees, were advertised for sale and 51 smaller lots comprising 4,992 trees. Seventeen lots of poles totalling 26,394 were also sold by auction. Approximately 3,500 tons of firewood mainly in the form of blocks were sold by public advertisement in addition to about 5,500 tons sold locally in one or two cord lots.

The number of felling notices received last year shows a slight decrease as compared with the previous year but is still considered higher than the pre-war average. This position is likely to continue so long as the woodworking industries have to rely in the main on imported timber and so far as information on the point has reached the Forestry Division it seems unlikely that imported timber will be available in the near future in quantities sufficient to meet the demands of the building industry alone.

Reports of breaches of the regulations in regard to tree-felling continue to be received, but in decreasing numbers and there appears to be a more general appreciation of the fact that the plea that timber is urgently required for one purpose or another does not justify indiscriminate felling.

I mentioned last year that, in view of the shortage of plants and fencing materials, persons who found it impossible to carry out replanting conditions imposed upon them as a condition of consent to the felling of trees on their lands would be granted any reasonable extension of time, in order to allow them to carry out their obligations. Though the situation has eased slightly in the meantime, supplies are still both scarce and dear, and I am, therefore, prepared to renew the offer made last year. I must, however, repeat again that postponement does not mean abandonment, and that eventually failure to carry out an undertaking to replant will be followed by prosecution. That is the whole account of forestry for the year and in view of the fact that the Dáil has discussed the Forestry Bill recently before the House I do not anticipate a long discussion now.

The Minister has very lucidly set out the programme of his Department for the coming year. We appreciate very heartily the great interest which the Minister is taking in national afforestation and in the encouragement and extension of nurseries and the growing of trees around homesteads as shelter belts, not only for the intrinsic value of the timber, but also in view of the requirements of our national game of hurling. Complaints are made of the scarcity of ash in many counties where hurling is the national game and it is to be hoped that a reasonable proportion of ash will be included in the programme. The Minister pointed out that all aspects of the question have been dealt with already. Undoubtedly, any expenditure by the Minister and by the Department on forestry should be encouraged because it will provide a valuable national asset.

As the Minister stated, there is not much to be said on the Estimate, because everything was covered during the discussions on the Forestry Bill. I notice that there is an inclination to make progress in the development of forestry and I look forward with a certain amount of hope to things moving faster in the years to come. It is understood that during the coming year the machinery of the Forestry Bill cannot be put into operation, but we have the assurance of the Minister that progress will be made during the winter.

This country is a long way behind with forestry development and no matter how fast we move in that direction now, very few members of this House will see the results. When trees are planted we have to wait until they develop. Some people say that the life of a tree is from 25 to 30 years and others say that it is from 50 to 60 years. If we take it that the average life of a tree is 40 years, it is doubtful if any of the Deputies who are now interested will see any result of our present forestry proposals. However, that should not deter us from getting on with the work.

It is time now to give every encouragement to the Government to get on with the job. If it were not for the forests that were planted in this country, even though they were planted by a foreign government at the expense of the Irish people and on land that our people should be living on, we would have been in a bad way in recent years for timber. We had as good schemes of afforestation under the British Government as we had in recent years. In the district in which I live local landlords boasted that they would grow trees instead of having chimney stacks on houses. How well they succeeded can be seen by anybody who goes through the country. It is some consolation to know that some of the landlords who boasted in that way are not there now, but many of the chimney stacks and the trees are there. I think much more land could be acquired for forestry without much trouble.

These matters were gone into in the debate on the Forestry Bill. It is not in order to discuss now decisions that were arrived at during a debate on recent legislation.

The Department could move faster in the way of acquiring common or bog land during the coming year. Trees can be grown with great advantage on poor land and on cut-away bog. There are thousands of acres of such land in Mayo which are suitable for forestry if a move in that direction was made. There will always be a market for timber. As there is also a great scarcity of wood pulp at present, every country is developing forestry. In future there should be no indiscriminate felling of trees, otherwise the country will be denuded of timber. The scenic beauty of shelter belts has also been referred to.

That matter was raised several times on the Forestry Bill, and the Deputy cannot go over ground that has been already covered.

Has the Minister not raised the question on the Estimate?

The Minister mentioned it in the Estimate, but it cannot be discussed now. I want to shorten the discussion.

I wish to encourage the spending of more money on forestry. If the Minister spends ten times as much money he will find this Party in agreement with him. The only fault I have to find with the Estimate is that more money is not being allocated by the Forestry Department to do more work.

Can the Minister give an assurance that the men who are cutting the trees in the forests will get a living wage? They are being paid about 38/- a week, which is not even up to the agricultural rate of wages. As a big sum of money is being included in the Estimate for wages, I wish to point out to the Minister that the men employed on forestry in my constituency state that they would not remain there if they could get other work, owing to the wages being so small. They are the lowest paid men in the country. Their wages are below those of agricultural workers and county council workers.

If we are to have forestry, at least the people who go out to plant the trees in the woods in the wintertime should be looked after. Sometimes they have to walk long distances to the woods from their homes. During the emergency, they had no bicycle tyres and had to get there as best they could. It is only right that this section of the people I represent, the workers, should get some consideration under any Bill brought into this House. Unfortunately, in all the Bills brought in, it is very seldom a fair wage clause is inserted, except in the case of building contracts. While the farmers are paying £2 a week, the State pays 38/-. That is a very bad procedure to set before the people who are footing the bill, the ratepayers all over the country, including those workers. If they cannot get a living wage out of forestry or agriculture or any other industry, the industry is no good to that section of the people. I appeal to the Minister to give me some guarantee that he will consider the wages of those people who have no bonus. The industrial workers can get £3 or £4 a week and a cost-of-living bonus of 15/-. These men should be considered for a higher rate of wages, or the bonus should be applied to them.

Ba mhaith liom ceist do chur ar an Aire. Nuair a bheidh sé a tabhairt freagra anso, ba mhaith liom go nabrochaidh sé céard tá an fhuireann sin, an fo-roinn foraoiseachta, ag déanamh maidir le cuid de na áiteanna atá molta acu le haghaidh cranna i gConamara.

In regard to the agricultural shows, I imagine it would help very much if the Minister could arrange that, at all our shows in the country, especially in rural areas, there would be an exhibition which would interest the people in forestry. Until we get the people forestry-minded, so that they themselves will try to do a little, we will never get to the pitch we hope to reach.

It is a little too much to be expecting the Forestry Department to plant this, that and the other. If we could get our people to think in that direction, there would be much greater progress in a very short time. If the Department would consider the shows in the rural areas and send exhibits there, they would make progress, perhaps, as fast as some of us, including the Minister, would wish. The Minister says he hopes to see the replacement of all the woods which were cut down. I hope to see the same thing, but I am afraid it is only a hope and nothing more, as I am afraid we will never see it in our days at the rate we are going. I do not blame the Department, as I know what they had to contend with in the last couple of years and I know also that, in the coming year, the progress cannot be anything like what it should be. I regret to say that I feel I will never see the day when all those woods will be replaced and replanted.

If I am not out of order, I would like to bring to the Minister's attention a matter concerning my own area. It was before the Department's officials a few times last year. The Minister should seriously consider certain areas, such as I have in mind, where the Department took over for forestry portion of land just beside a town, where the people were crying out for a park. That happened in the case of the Mountbellew Estate in County Galway and it was unfair. Of course, it is all right saying with one side of your mouth that you should encourage forestry and acquire land for it and then, on the other side, saying you should not have acquired some piece of land which was taken over. I realise that, but where people require a plot of ground beside a town for use, say, as a cow park, it should not be acquired for forestry. There is quite a lot of suitable land elsewhere.

I do not agree with Deputy Commons that every class of bogland and wasteland is going to grow trees. It is not, in my opinion; the better the land, the better for the plantation. However, in the Mountbellew case, that plantation was not the success it should have been and that was pointed out to the Department. Still, the Department felt otherwise about it—that it was a success. It is planted a few years now and it is not a success. Of course, I know well it is not suitable for officials to say that some plantation of their own is not a success. There certainly was a case of hardship as regards Mountbellew.

Regarding the exhibits at the shows, the greatest thing the Department could do would be to get the people forestry-minded, as if we are dependent on the Department and the Minister we will never make the progress we hope to make in our time. If we can get the people thinking and feeling in that way, so that they would strain a point to have some little plantations of their own here and there, it would be for their own benefit later on, or for those coming after them, and would beautify the countryside. By that means, we may go towards the position the Minister said he hopes to see, where many of the woods that were hewed down will be replaced.

I notice that, from 1937 to 1946, the Estimate for Forestry has been about doubled. However, I feel that the amount allotted is not sufficient. I look upon forestry, not in the light that Deputy Donnellan looks upon it, as I believe the Department should be responsible for it and that it should not be left to the private individual. I do not object to any private individual planting a few trees alongside his home for shelter, but the idea that we should encourage individuals to plant shelter-beds and that forestry should be looked upon from the beauty point of view, does not seem sound to me.

I look on forestry from the point of view of the benefit it is going to bring to the country. I would hope that in 20 of 30 years' time it will be a great industry, giving employment to thousands of young men and old men. I believe that we have millions of acres of land that are suitable for afforestation and that are not suitable for cultivation or grazing. Experts will tell you that, on the western seaboard of Connaught, forestry will not be a success due to the hard winds from the Atlantic. Other experts say that the outer belts of trees, if they do not reach a height of five feet, will remain static and may go back, but that the inner planting will succeed and will mature. While the failure of the outer belt may be considered a loss, it may also be considered as a sort of protection for the inner planting. It has afforded the inner belt protection against the hard winds. In that way the successes far offset the failures due to hard winds and climatic conditions. The Department should not be afraid to take a chance. They may not think it wise to run the risk of a loss of £500,000 or £2,000,000 or £3,000,000 in going ahead with a big scheme of forestry. I do not believe that if a big scheme was embarked upon we would have a dead loss.

The reason given for the moss found in the bogs is that timber was grown in them some hundreds of years ago. Some of the experts say that the moss would kill a plantation if put in the bogs. Other experts hold different views. I believe that a country denuded of forests is just as bad as a country denuded of its people. I am very interested in this forestry question, because I believe that if it were tackled properly it would help to solve our unemployment problem. I think that the Department should face it courageously, and that, even if there was a dead loss of £2,000,000, the Government would not be blamed. I think that a big scheme such as I have in mind would get the backing of every Party in the Dáil, and that if money were lost we would not ask where it went. Now that the war is over, and that wire and other equipment should be available shortly, I think we should make preparations for a larger production. Afforestation should be undertaken on a national scale and not be left to individuals or groups of individuals.

If that were done our ports and sawmills would soon be busy once again. Timber can now be used for more than roofing and the making of furniture. By the application of scientific processes, it can be used for almost anything. It is a schame, I think, that we have to depend for our timber requirements on the Scandinavian countries, on the South American States and on Russia. The experts tell us that we cannot grow trees in our bogs. Others hold the opposite view, and I agree with them that we can. We find the roots of trees in the bogs so that hundreds of years ago these bogs were great forests. If the bogs were properly drained they would grow trees again. In conclusion, I urge on the Department to embark on a large-scale afforestation scheme, not a few hundred or a few thousand acres, but on the embracing millions of acres. If we are able to provide ourselves with the timber that we require, then we will be in a position to have hives of industry in the country, with consequent employment and security for the people within the State.

In view of the fact that we had a debate recently on the Forestry Bill, it is not my intention to go over the same ground again. Deputy Cafferky has raised a very important question, namely, why we should not go out on a much wider scheme of afforestation than that indicated by the Minister, and be prepared to consider it in terms of tens of thousands of acres rather than in terms of thousands of acres. I think there is a lot to be said for the Deputy's point of view. If we are going to have a Forestry Department it ought to be a commercially paying proposition, and if it is it will not be any burden on the taxpayer. We ought to hope to reach the condition of affairs when our State forests will become an asset to the State, a source of revenue to it rather than something which has to supported out of taxation. That raises the question as to how long the taxpayer will have to go on making contributions towards afforestation, as to when the point is likely to be reached when afforestation will become a source of national revenue. I would like to get some definite information on that point from the Minister: that is, whether he envisages that within a reasonable period of years the State forests will become a source of revenue. If the Minister believes that they will, as I think he must, then he should be prepared to plan afforestation on the basis of a national loan, because it would certainly seem that the taxpayer of the present day should not be heavily burdened in order to produce a high revenue for future generations. If the Minister believes that afforestation can be made a source of revenue to the State, as it must if it is a success, then he should not hesitate to borrow practically the whole of the capital required for the acquisition of land for planting. It could be arranged on a long-term loan, payable when the plantations had reached maturity.

I think I was misunderstood—I am sure I was not deliberately misrepresented—when I talked about the difficulty which the ordinary farmer had in undertaking planting to any extent worth speaking of. I believe it is possible for the individual farmer to provide shelter belts on his farm on little pieces of waste land, such as in the corners of fields, but I think that is as far as he can go. The idea of the ordinary farmer planting two acres or three acres on inferior land which happens to be on his farm is not one that, I think, can be entertained with any great confidence. There may be a few farmers through the country who could undertake that work, but the most that the average farmer could undertake to plant would be a few perches here and there in the corners of fields. That will not make much change in the number of trees in the country or the amount of land under plantations.

I know from experience that farmers are tending more and more to remove trees from hedgerows, Farmers do not want trees between fields which they have under cultivation. In the old days the good landlords—and there was quite a number of them—did go out for plantation on a fairly large scale. In many cases they planted hard wood timber. You see the trees to-day all over the country in the hedgerows, but the farmers of to-day do not bless the landlords who did that. They rather curse them, I think, for their energy and enterprise, because these trees are a source of injury to all crops, even to permanent pasture. Therefore, the countryside will be more and more denuded of hedgerow timber. It is therefore necessary to do as Deputy Donnellan has suggested, that is, to encourage farmers to plant shelter belts where they would not be harmful to crops, that is, in corners of fields or in waste portions of their land. I want again to appeal to the Minister to accept the view that we can never get the millions of acres of forests that we talk about unless we are prepared to plant small areas of from four to ten acres all over the country. I should like to take the Minister to see a part of my constituency that is not extensively planted, that is, West Wicklow from Poulaphouca to Baltinglass. There are steep gradients there in more or less agricultural areas. They are not very extensive but would aggregate to hundreds of acres. They are in isolated areas of three to eight acres. They are practically no use for grazing or agricultural purposes but would make excellent plantations and, if planted, would transform the appearance of the countryside in addition to providing a valuable commodity that is so urgently needed for industry and domestic purposes. The Minister ought to consider that.

I believe that compulsory acquisition is not necessary on a wide scale. It may be necessary, in order to complete a particular afforestation scheme in a particular area, to acquire certain land compulsorily but in the main land will be acquired by voluntary agreement and, if it were possible to get farmers to agree to part with small portions of waste land on their holdings and allow the Forestry Department to take them over and plant them, that would make a valuable contribution to the scheme of afforestation and would distribute timber more widely over the country. At the present time the tendency is to concentrate on particular areas and the larger the better. I suppose that is sound economy but, from a national point of view, it is desirable that woodlands should be spread far and wide throughout the length and breadth of the country. While the objections that have been raised to that suggestion are real, they can be surmounted. There is, of course, the objection that it is more difficult to supervise and manage scattered plantations but there are advantages to be gained, first, that such land might be acquired more cheaply than a large acreage in one area, secondly, that there might be more co-operation on the part of the local community, and thirdly, the beautifying of the countryside. These are matters that ought to be considered. There is another point which I have often raised, that is, the comparative value of land used for sheep-grazing and land used for afforestation. Some definite figure should be given in regard to that. I forget at the moment the figure which the Minister gave in that connection but I do not accept it.

Did we not discuss that matter on the Forestry Bill?

We touched on it at any rate but I would like the Minister when replying to say that in his reference to the value of land for sheep-grazing he had in mind some particular type of land. It is quite obvious that one acre of land may be worth only 3/- or 4/- a year for sheep-grazing while another acre, required for planting, may be worth £3 or £4 a year. It is very hard to lay down a hard and fast rule and to strike an average.

I should like the Minister to tell us what is going to happen to the land on the Moore-Hall demesne that was provisionally taken over for afforestation purposes. Is it intended to use all the agricultural land on the Ashford demesne for afforestation purposes? I am fully in favour of afforestation—I agree with Deputy Cafferky to that extent—but I cannot forget that the overriding consideration in a county like Mayo is land distribution and acquisition. Where the Forestry Department acquires even what might be considered inferior agricultural land it is bound to clash with local public opinion. Before acquiring land they would want to be sure of their ground and to ascertain that there would be no local opposition. There are parts of County Mayo which, if subjected to intensive reclamation, could be converted for afforestation purposes but, even in the mountainy districts in Mayo, there is rough, inferior grazing, which might in other counties be considered as ideally suitable for afforestation but which would be the subject of local opposition if taken over by the Forestry Department. The people there have such a sense of the value of their land that they would look with jealousy and suspicion on anything that might encroach on what they would consider their right to have it for grazing. I disagree with Deputy Cafferky when he says that no encouragement should be given to the private planter. I think every encouragement should be given to the private planter. There is no use, however, in going on the basis of the old landlords in the way of planting, because they did not plant for commercial reasons. They planted trees to beautify their demesnes and grounds. That was their chief idea. They did not plant trees as a cash crop.

There has been no specific disapproval of the Estimate for forestry, and the various points raised can be met on the Report Stage of the Forestry Bill.

Vote put and agreed to.
Barr
Roinn