When progress was reported last evening, I was dealing with the importance of afforestation to the country. As other Deputies have stated and as is admitted, at the moment we have only slightly over 1 per cent. of our area under forests. This percentage is inadequate to maintain the necessary quantities of homegrown timber to maintain equable climatic conditions, the prevention of soil erosion, the creation of essential quantities of humus, wind-breaks, and the most perfect method of controlling extremes of flood and drought. I mentioned also that the general opinion seems to be that only waste land should be utilised for afforestation. That, I think, is a complete misunderstanding of the position. If afforestation is to fulfil the requirements that I mentioned, it will be necessary to acquire substantial tracts of land that would be suitable and very suitable for agriculture. There is, as was pointed out, in the Department of Lands a considerable conflict between the Land Commission and the forestry division. The Land Commission has as its objective the acquisition and division of land into suitable holdings, and that section of the Minister's Department is not anxious to make available any land that can be farmed to the forestry division of his Department. If soil erosion is to be counteracted, we cannot do that simply by growing our forests on waste land. It will be necessary, I think, for the forestry division to prepare a national plan which will make provision for the establishment of forests in the proper places in the country. The activities of the Land Commission and the activities of the forestry division can be co-ordinated by the Minister, provided there is a comprehensive plan prepared.
I do admit that, for the present at any rate, and under the present circumstances, it would be rather difficult to carry out the planning programme that Clann na Poblachta advocated, or the planning programme that Clann na Talmhan advocated. There are practical difficulties in the way. We believe, however, that if the plan is properly made and if there is determination on the part of the Minister to put that plan into operation we can easily double the annual acreage that Fianna Fáil indicated as their objective. One of the difficulties in their way is the insufficiency of trained technical staff. I understand that it will take some time to train this staff technically and, consequently, the plan the Minister must have in mind must be a plan making provision for the training of a technical staff to carry out afforestation successfully. According to my information, the staff that we have at the moment, although it is small, is a very efficient staff, which can hold its own with any afforestation staff anywhere in the world. But, unfortunately, it is too small. Those 26 years have been allowed to pass by two Governments —Cumann na nGaedheal and Fianna Fáil—without the building up, as they should have built up, of a proper technical staff, so that we would have now available the trained personnel to carry out the annual programme of planting that Clann na Poblachta and Clann na Talmhan advocated.
I understand that a mistake was made some time ago when we had as director of the Forestry Division a person who received his training in Germany and that substantial belts were planted with similar timber. I understand that that is a mistake and that, if the full value is to be obtained from afforestation, short-lived trees and long-lived trees must be planted in a uniform manner. The object of that is to make suitable provision for the essential watering of the timber. You require a certain amount of timber with roots that do not go down very deep into the ground and, side by side with that, planted in the way our present director of afforestation would advise, timber with roots which go much deeper into the ground. Three water tables would be more successful than two.
I am informed that Californian red wood is a valuable and beautiful timber and that, outside the red wood belt in North-Western California, this country is the only country in which it can be grown satisfactorily, and that there are magnificent specimens at Summerhill, County Meath; Fort Granite, County Wicklow; Stradbally Hall in Laoighis, and at Ashford, Cong, County Mayo. These are matters on which I do not pretend to have technical knowledge, but they have been brought to my attention by a person who has technical knowledge and experience in timber growing and afforestation all over the world.
It was mentioned here that the forestry division required belts or areas of 300 acreas to make the area under afforestation successful and economic. I am informed that 300 is a slightly low acreage and that the suitable economic acreage is 450. That, again, is a technical matter and I would be quite prepared, from the information I have got as to the efficiency of our present director of the forestry division, to leave that matter in his hands.
Deputies have referred to the problem of private planting where owners of land who have cut timber are compelled to replant. I agree with the general criticism with regard to that. If this private planting is to be successful it should be done, or the owner should be compelled to do it, to the satisfaction of the forestry division. The requirements of the law can be carried out at small expense but, from the point of view of timber-growing or afforestation, the present practices are useless.
I was very pleased with the approach that was made by the Deputies who took part in the debate. I was particularly impressed by Deputy Seán Collins' contribution. If we are all as determined with regard to afforestation as the debate yesterday would indicate, then I think the Minister has behind him the goodwill and support of this House in putting into effect the afforestation programme of his own Party within a short time.
I agree also with what Deputy Seán Dunne and other Deputies said with regard to the wages of forestry workers. These workers should be paid sufficient to enable them to exist under reasonably decent conditions. That should be the measure of whether the wages paid are adequate or not. This thing of gearing the wages of forestry workers to the wages paid to agricultural workers is only part of a general plan that someone seems to have worked out to keep the wages of agricultural workers, forestry workers, road workers and turf workers as low as possible. If one endeavours to get an increase in wage for any one of these classes of workers, he is countered by the argument that it is geared to the other rate of wages and cannot be disturbed. That has been the position here for many years and, unfortunately, people with that outlook still seem to have a substantial say in the running of the country.
Only a few nights ago, with regard to the farm workers in Portrane Mental Hospital, the very same excuse was trotted out, that they cannot be paid a wage higher than that paid to agricultural workers in the area. That must be broken down. I would ask the Minister to discuss this matter of wages with the forestry workers and to give the forestry workers what he considers to be a living wage, a wage on which they can marry and bring up a family in ordinary conditions of comfort. If the Minister will once break through his old idea of gearing all these wages together he will have done a very useful and a very good work.
Deputy Little seemed to think yesterday that it was wrong to advocate an increase in wages for forestry workers, and said that it was dangerous to be developing this class consciousness. I cannot, I must say, understand the mentality of any person who is reasonably well supplied with the world's goods and thinks it a crime or a shame that anyone should advocate that our lowest-paid workers—who are paid below the ordinary standards of decency—should be brought up to a living wage.