I welcome the Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine, Deputy Andrew Doyle.
Forestry Sector: Statements
I thank the Leas-Chathaoirleach and Members of the Seanad for this opportunity to discuss forestry and to acknowledge the important contribution that forestry makes to our economy, our environment and our society. While we can see the obvious benefits of forestry such as loads of timber, logs and planks being transported on our roads, the cars of workers outside timber processing plants, firewood and timber products, the contribution of forestry in other ways, for example, to climate change mitigation, biodiversity and water quality, may not always be fully understood or appreciated. I propose to outline the development of Irish forestry to date, the way in which we are seeking to continue the progress and the benefits we derive from our investment.
While the State started from a very low base with forest cover of less than 1.5% of Ireland’s land area - or just 125,000 ha of forests - in the early 1900s, this has steadily increased over the 20th century. The bulk of this increase occurred since the late 1980s, following the introduction of State and, subsequently, EU funding towards the establishment of private forests. While the findings of the most recent national forestry inventory are due to be published shortly, the second such inventory found that the area of forest cover in Ireland in 2012 was nearly 732,000 ha, or 10.5% of the land area. Senators will agree that this was a significant increase, one outcome of which is a vibrant export-oriented timber industry with more than 75% of the output of Ireland’s saw milling and 80% of wood-based panel production being exported. It should also be noted that the overall Irish forest industry, comprising growing, harvesting and processing of forest products, contributes €2.3 billion to the national economy, generates annual exports of over €350 million and employs more than 12,000 people.
The economic activity of the forest sector is spread through every region of the State and makes an important contribution to regional development and the rural economy. Forestry also represents a significant income stream for landowners. My Department issues payments annually in respect of grant-aided forests to more than 15,000 forest owners, the majority of whom are farmers. In 2017, a total capital expenditure of nearly €100 million was paid under the forestry schemes with grants, premiums and funding for other support measures such as assistance towards building of forest roads to facilitate the management, thinning and harvesting of the timber crop. The timber crop itself also provides a valuable and increasingly important income stream.
The current forestry programme, under which my Department operates forestry schemes such as the afforestation scheme, runs to 2020. The programme offers an ambitious and attractive set of forestry measures aimed at increasing timber production while at the same time improving the quality of our natural environment. The achievement of these objectives involves the commitment of €482 million over the period of the programme. This level of investment will facilitate an increase in forest cover by almost 44,000 ha and the construction of 690 km of forest roads.
A recent mid-term review of the forestry programme found, however, that there has been a shortfall in overall planting levels, compared to the targets in the programme, and that the proportion of broadleaf planting is not meeting the annual target. The measures in the programme were re-examined and have now been enhanced with the aim of increasing planting levels and introducing greater diversity in terms of the species being planted, with a particular emphasis on increasing the percentage of broadleaf cover. Forests serve a multi-functional role, which I will elaborate on later. In view of this function, the enhanced measures also aim to support Government policy in other areas. For example, the introduction of improved grant and premium rates for agroforestry and forestry for fibre, while aimed at encouraging more farmers to see forestry as part of their farming mix, may also contribute to biomass supply in support of the proposed support scheme for renewable heat.
Native woodlands established along sensitive watercourses can deliver a range of water-related ecosystem services and can form part of the toolbox of measures the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, and others might consider for strategic deployment under the river basin management plan. I will shortly be launching a woodlands for water measure, the aim of which will be to deliver meaningful ecosystem services that protect and enhance water quality and aquatic ecosystems. Further incentives such as higher rates and measures to protect broadleaf woodlands against deer damage have been put in place following the midterm review to encourage the planting of native species. Improvements to the native woodland conservation scheme and the introduction of a continuous cover forestry scheme will also support the objectives of the National Biodiversity Action Plan 2017-2021.
Forestry is an integral part of our landscape, a significant contributor to the economy, the environment and society and it also serves as a means to support and assist policy initiatives in other areas, as I have just outlined. I welcome the announcement by the Government, in the context of the national development plan, of its continued support for afforestation. Recently I announced a review of the national response to the ash dieback disease. This includes a review of the reconstitution ash dieback scheme and the all-Ireland chalara control strategy 2013. The review comes after a high-level stakeholder meeting in Dublin in which we received the most up-to-date scientific information on the prevalence of the disease in ash plantations in Ireland. I believe it is time for a new approach in Ireland to ash dieback. It is clear from the latest scientific advice that eradication here is no longer considered feasible. Given this updated advice, our policy response must also change.
The reconstitution ash dieback scheme will be reviewed to ensure its continued relevance and value for money, and to ensure that the forest owner is provided with a broader range of silvicultural and management options. For farmers this new policy response will mean more options if their forests are affected with the disease and we will continue to inform and support them if they have ash dieback. I believe that many farmers with ash dieback on larger trees would like the opportunity to grow the forest on and produce a crop of ash timber without fear of their annual premiums being stopped. As a first step, I recently announced that the Department will no longer be ending premium payments to farmers who wish to continue managing their ash plantations where the prevalence of the disease is low.
Among the benefits of forestry is the economic value of forestry for employment, exports and farm income. In that context, the forest sector is playing an increasingly important role in rural development, not only through the diversification of farm income from the payment of annual forestry premiums and income from timber sales but also through the provision of sustainable rural-based employment.
I shall now turn to the environmental benefits of forestry, which are wide ranging. Well sited forest plantations can provide a filtration buffer preventing sedimentation from reaching sensitive watercourses; they can slow down the flow of rainwater from higher elevations thereby reducing the risk of flooding and they provide important habitats for wildlife.
Forests also have an important role to play in climate change mitigation. Benefits include sequestering carbon, providing an additional long term store of carbon in harvested wood and substituting non-renewable, high emissions materials and fossil fuels.
Under the provisionally agreed effort sharing regulation, up to 26.8 million tonnes of carbon dioxide from forests and other land uses can be accounted for in meeting our 2021 to 2030 emissions reduction target. The majority of this will come from the State’s investment in afforestation. The abatement cost of afforestation is estimated to be €23 per tonne which makes forestry very cost competitive as a climate change mitigation tool, particularly relative to alternative measures in the land sector. In addition, the ability of wood to substitute for emissions-intensive materials supports other sectors in their decarbonisation efforts. We hear increasing commentary about the bioeconomy which refers to the economic activity derived from the use of biological resources to produce food, feed materials and energy. The concept of a bioeconomy has emerged in response to the challenges of food security, energy security, climate change and the depletion of non-renewable resources. I understand that virtually everything that can be made from fossil resources can also be made from biological resources. Substituting sustainably produced biomass for fossil resources facilitates decarbonisation and continued economic growth.
The Irish forestry sector has a major role to play and huge potential in the emerging bioeconomy. This role and potential is explored in the report, Growing the Irish Forest Bioeconomy, produced by COFORD under the programme of competitive forestry research. This report gives a comprehensive overview of the subject and the way in which the further development of forestry could contribute to Ireland’s national policy on the bioeconomy. It is vital that the development of the forestry sector is focused on people because forests can deliver important social benefits. Forests, for example, provide people with opportunities to exercise, to spend time with their families in the outdoors, and to enjoy being close to nature and being surrounded by scenic landscapes. Time spent away from the hustle and bustle of modern life can contribute to a healthier state of mind and a feeling of well-being. For example, last year’s green ribbon campaign included a series of six forest walks organised by the IFA in association with See Change, Coillte and Mental Health Ireland. I understand that these "Let’s Talk and Walk" events have been a great initiative to help get people talking openly about mental health problems, and forest trails provide a relaxing, peaceful environment for such events.
Resources within my Department are therefore focused on developing recreational and environmental aspects of woodlands which can be enjoyed by local communities and visitors alike. This is being achieved through the enhancement of Ireland’s native woodland resource, thereby delivering landscape and ecological benefits to society and through investment in local amenity areas in the form of so-called neighbourwoods. Our national strategic goal for forestry is to develop an internationally competitive and sustainable forestry sector that provides a full range of economic, environmental and social benefits to society and which accords with the Forest Europe definition of sustainable forest management. I have outlined some of those benefits. My Department and I continue to work towards that goal through the introduction and enhancement of schemes and the roll-out of initiatives, including the development of knowledge transfer groups to assist forest owners to develop their knowledge of forestry and the design of a certification scheme to assist them to achieve forest certification. The Department also funds forest research projects to inform our policymaking and to assist the sector ranging from nurseries, growers, processors and end users.
I hope I have given a reasonable insight into the Irish forestry sector and I look forward to hearing the contributors. We will be taking notes. There is an official with me from the Department, a senior forestry inspector. I look forward to hearing the responses.
I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Doyle, to the House and I thank him for his very comprehensive contribution, some of which I will mention during my brief contribution. On behalf of my colleague, Senator Paul Daly, who is unavoidably absent, I thank the Minister of State for his opening comments. My party, Fianna Fáil, is committed to developing the forestry sector in Ireland which plays a critical role in environmental, economic and social policy. The forestry industry, which consists of the growing, harvesting and processing of forestry, makes a massive contribution to the economy, estimated at €2.2 billion per annum with around 12,000 jobs dependent on that sector. Timber production is in the region of 3 million cu. m every year, with around 20% of this amount produced from private landowners.
Forests, as the Minister of State has mentioned, cover 10.5% of the country’s land area against the EU average of 38%, showing the substantial progress that has yet to be made here.
I grew up on the fringes of Killykeen Forest Park in County Cavan, a beautiful 240 ha forest set on the shores of Lough Oughter. That incorporates 74 acres with 28 log cabins that have recently been sold to a private entity by Coillte and I look forward to that developing in the near future for the benefit of the local community. In the future I would like to see more investment, in Killykeen Forest Park, in particular because it is a beautiful amenity and it is open to huge development. There could be major benefit to the local community. Further down the road in Kingscourt in east County Cavan is the Dún a Rí Forest Park which forms part of what was formerly the Cabra estate which was owned by the Pratt family. Legend stretches back to the time of Cú Chulainn, the Gaelic warrior who rested in these woods while fighting the armies of Queen Maeve of Connacht. There is a great diversity of wildlife in the park and the flora is varied and in many areas spectacular. Just across the border from south County Cavan, in County Longford there are plans well under way to develop a Center Parcs holiday village in Newcastle Wood. This will be of huge economic benefit, not only to County Longford but also to the counties surrounding it, and it will bring in visitors primarily from the UK and from mainland Europe. We welcome that development.
It was under a Fianna Fáil Government that ambitious planting targets of 10,000 ha per annum were set out in the National Development Plan 2007-2013 with more than 8,000 ha planted in 2010 alone. Regrettably, in recent years, annual planting targets have been downgraded to 6000 to 7000 ha, significantly behind the Food Wise 2025 annual afforestation target of 15,000 ha per annum. The recently published mid-term review of the Government’s 2014-2020 forestry programme unfortunately confirmed this pattern, with total afforestation planting figures for the first three years of the programme, 2015 to 2017, inclusive, 7% less than the cumulative target for this period. Shockingly, the planting targets for agroforestry, native woodlands and forestry for fibre combined were missed by 74%. Meanwhile, overall planting targets were missed by 22% in 2017 alone.
Forestry has a key role to play in the reduction of Irish carbon emissions. Afforestation is a vital tool in reducing our carbon footprint, with 300,000 ha of new forests planted since 1990 absorbing a massive 18% of Irish agriculture’s annual greenhouse gas emissions. Ireland’s forests removed 4.3 million tonnes of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere in 2015 alone. The inclusion of land use, land-use change and forestry, LULUCF, within the scope of the new EU 2030 climate change framework is a welcome development and represents a sensible approach which broadens, through carbon removal, the tools available to Ireland in reducing its greenhouse gas emissions.
It will enable Ireland to access the removal of 26.8 million tonnes of CO2 over the 2021 to 2030 period.
I very much welcome the initiatives the Minister of State is bringing forward and continuing. In particular, I refer to the green ribbon campaign which is a very worthwhile campaign that I would like to see extended to more forests owned by Coillte. It has a hugely positive impact on people's mental health. I would like the Minister to encourage it, expand it where possible and encourage people to go out walking in our beautiful forests, not only once a year, but as often as possible. I look forward to continued success by the Minister of State in his role in the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine with responsibility for this area and in the other areas for which he has responsibility. It is always very positive to see the Minister of State in the House.
The Minister of State is very welcome. It is an issue very close to my heart. I was very involved in forestry in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Coming from a dairying background, which I did in the 1960s and 1970s, I know forestry is an extension of farming. At that stage, massive incentives were given by the Irish Government in conjunction with the European Union to incentivise people like me to invest in private forestry. I jumped at the chance because at that stage 75% of the funding was given by Europe to increase the acreage. One of the things that disappointed me in the report is that the percentage of land used for forestry is one of the lowest in Europe. We have the highest rate for tree growing in the world in Ireland with all of our rain and the climate we have.
In the 1980s I had about 1,000 acres which I planted in the Pettigo area. The grant that was available afforded me the opportunity to do so. I bought the land, which was land on which, as we say in the west of Ireland, one would not raise a snipe. It was no good for broadleaves either. Broadleaves need good land. It was mainly spruces and pines, which are fast growing and have huge value. Coillte has been the backbone of this country for years and was hugely helpful to the private sector. It was helpful to me in the late 1980s and early 1990s.
It is necessary to fence off forest because there are a lot of wild deer in the wilds and once the top is taken off the leader, it is gone. That is why we need protection. Deer love the leaves of the broadleaves so they have to be kept out. Many people think it is only a case of planting the trees and forgetting about them, but that is not so. There is a lot of husbandry involved in the forestry industry. The land has to be drained, ploughed or mounded, which is the best method for planting, so that the trees have more stability.
A number of us who were involved in the private sector at that stage brought a helicopter over from Scotland to fertilise the land. It was accurate. That was back in the late 1980s. It was in its infancy at the time. I am sure it has come on in leaps and bounds since then. The scheme under the European Union and Irish Government at that time was free of capital gains tax, which is an incentive. I got out of it because I was moving all my business to the United States. I was able to get out and at a good time. It was a capital gains tax free scheme. It was a huge incentive. I do not know what the incentives are now because I have not kept up to date with it.
It created employment for local people. Much forestry is in poorer areas because the land used is poor. Most people there were on the dole and their incomes were supplemented by planting and fertilising and by the husbandry involved in looking after forests. It is a residual industry. It has value apart from the resale value. There are thinnings and the forest is mature after 30 or 35 years. The second growth is the best growth because the nutrients are in the ground. There are massive benefits.
I am disappointed to hear today that we still have such low coverage. It went from 1% to 10% in 2012. I am sure it has increased again but it is not up as much as it should be. We have the best growing conditions in Europe for forestry. It is something we should look at much more closely. It is a massive natural asset and can create a lot of employment in poorer rural areas which is badly needed when all the jobs are going to big cities and towns. There are a lot of new rules about areas of scientific interest. I understand all that. The area was reduced. If a person had about 400 acres, it was necessary to split it into four different parts and plan for 100 acres or whatever. It has to be streamlined. I am sure it is. We should keep incentivising and get the private sector involved. The money is coming back again. The money is there and there is a lot of land. I understand why broadleaves are not increasing that much because the land has to be very good to grow broadleaves. Good land is used for other uses than trees, which is a long-term investment.
I welcome the Minister of State's interest. Forestry was good to me and I saw what it did for employment in the area. The recreational use of forestry for forest walks, for example, is becoming bigger. I had an old forester who guided me and helped me. He went to the forestry school at 17. He went out and planted land. He felled the same land he planted and he bought land. He had experience right through his whole life. He lived until he was 80. He was a fantastic guy. His name was Joe Hanahoe. He was an incredible man. He went through the whole forestry system and lived, talked and breathed forestry. Many forests in this country surround lakes and are covering them over. We have loads of trees in this country. It causes controversy sometimes with the locals because it is too cluttered. We should have breaks of 50 m in scenic areas where there is forestry. There should be a lovely view down into the lake. There are plenty of trees. We do not have to cover everything.
It is a fantastic industry and I miss it. I thank the Minister of State for his presentation today.
I welcome the Minister of State. This discussion is important because forestry is an important asset. Truth be told, more people would talk about the Amazon rainforest than they do about our forest in this country. Put simply, forests are lungs for human existence. They take in carbon, which is good, and give out oxygen. Policies that the Government pursues to increase forestry and planting in appropriate places are welcome. In the Minister of State's speech, he talked about renewable energy, with biomass being part of the mix. We see in forests that are well-kept, particularly traditional forests with traditional species native to our own country, that there is biodiversity with thriving wildlife and plants. In my home town of Ballina, there has been a great collaborative effort between Coillte and the Belleek Forest enhancement committee. They reintroduce native species and the red squirrel, which had departed. They are thriving. They were introduced a number of years ago. As Senator Lawless said, it is thriving as a recreational asset too. Many people go into the forest. Pathways have been paved. It is part of a greenway out of Ballina. Everybody is so proud of it. I welcome the work that has gone on with Coillte. It is a real asset for visitors and the community. That should be encouraged.
I welcome the Minister of State's announcement last week of the latest payment rounds of forestry grants of €17 million. That means that, this year, €56.8 million has been paid out in State grants for forestry. We need to incentivise the growth of forests. We know that the realisation of the value of the asset does not happen until the forest is fully matured. Therefore, people have to be encouraged to plant trees. If we do not encourage them and make payments, there is no incentive for people to tie up their land with forestry. We have a great tradition of forestry in my county. I give great credit to former Minister for Lands, Joseph Blowick. He was in Clann na Talmhan, back in the 1940s and 1950s, and he laid the foundation stone for State participation in forestry. In recent times, there has been accelerated investment because we have a better appreciation of climate change and the bio-economy the Minister of State referred to. Joseph Blowick had a vision at the time about the role forestry could play in local economies. There was land that lent itself to forest growing and otherwise was not in use.
The kernel of what I would have to say here today relates to the issue of land use, and competing interests of forestry and farming and food production. There are issues, without a doubt, even though having more forests is a desirable objective. In counties where there is much forestry, for example, Leitrim and Mayo, there are legitimate concerns among communities that there is a forest but the spin-off is not really there for the local communities because all that happens is that the forest grows, the trees are cut and they are shipped out. It is a pressing issue in Leitrim. People are quite despondent when they see that what used to be a farm holding is taken over and planted. They see it as a death knell to a household or farm family that lived there. People are looking for more than what is on offer at the moment. What I mean by that is, giving Mayo as a case, Coillte has a substantial holding in Mayo with a forest planted, and it fells trees when they are mature but they are put on a train from Ballina to Waterford. No value is added to the local community other than premiums that farmers or landowners might receive or that they receive themselves. We can talk about jobs and about that potential but it is not happening in the way that it should. I ask the Minister of State to ask Coillte to look at these counties and to seek to deliver more to the local economy.
I will give a stark example. We have planning permission on the Asahi site near Killala in County Mayo. It is for a combined heat and power plant which would involve the burning of wood and the drying of willow or such to make woodchips. It has all the licences through the Department of Communications, Climate Action and Environment. When the promoters were looking for the source of the raw material, Coillte would not sell to them. They may have contracts elsewhere but my point is that we were going to have a very live and real proposition to create local jobs, both within the combined heat and power plant and also to people producing timber, and Coillte did not play ball. It is shipping its wood elsewhere. The only alternative for this company was importing biomass. Talk about going contrary to the theory of reducing the carbon footprint. I know that it is a State company independent of the Minister of State but it needs to be challenged on issues such as this. It will show maps where it is doing good work but that is all in the south of the country. If one is planting in the north of the country and the people see nothing for it, it is not acceptable. Coillte needs to deliver more to counties Mayo and Leitrim and any other county in a similar situation. Other than that, we will not achieve the worthwhile targets for the reasons that have been given for why forestry is desirable. The Minister of State might respond to that.
There is an issue with the farm-forest partnerships that Coillte entered into with landowners, over 20 years ago in some cases. The Minister of State will recall an awful lot of farmers complaining that they signed up to deals with Coillte because it was a State company and they had confidence in it. They really feel let down that they have not been dealt with in a transparent way. Some did not have communication from Coillte for decades and did not receive payments. We had Coillte management before the Joint Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine on 27 February and they were to undertake a review of these partnership agreements. What is the Minister of State's view on this? What update can he give us on the review? What communication has Coillte had with him? Legitimate issues and concerns were raised about how Coillte was dealing with individuals. I feel that the attitude of Coillte was that it had entered into an agreement, it was all signed up and is legally binding. It did not involve people who had equal negotiating power. Coillte has the legal and financial muscle and its behaviour towards the ordinary widow or widower, or whoever in the country has been persuaded to get involved in these partnerships, left a lot to be desired. Will the Minister of State update us about what is happening? A number of people are affected. I look forward to the Minister of State's responses.
It was good to hear the Minister of State talk about ecosystem services with regard to forestry. The one thing the previous speakers and I all have in common is that we would like to see more forestry in the right places in Ireland, which would require an increase in Government support for forestry. Forestry is unsurprisingly a topic of great interest to me as an ecologist and to the Green Party. As our agricultural model changes and adapts to a warming world and a globalised economy, forestry plays an ever-increasing role in supporting the income of farmers and managing our rural landscape. I emphasise that we, as a party, support the principle of using forestry to enhance our natural habitants, mitigate climate change and provide income to farmers and other landowners in Ireland. Forestry, when done right, can be an important social support, enhance the natural beauty of our island and provide habitats for species under threat.
There is a "but" of course. I am sure the Minister of State is familiar with the work of the Save Leitrim campaign, as mentioned by my colleague, which opposes the blanketing of that stunning county in non-native coniferous spruce trees. The campaign has highlighted the social, environmental and economic effects of this campaign over recent years. Just this week I came across a video the group made comprising aerial shots of the dark monoculture plantations blotting out large areas, damaging soil and leaving devastation in the wake of the clear-cutting that removes every tree at once and leaves behind only debris. The social effects of these policies are as concerning as the environmental side of the matter. The people of Leitrim have talked of the feeling of a county emptying out, of people being replaced by dark, foreboding and unwelcoming plantations, of communities separated and of the mental health effects these rapid changes can have on people living there. The very model that the Government is supporting is one at odds with European norms. It damages our local communities and fosters such resentment towards forestry as a policy.
Another way is possible. The Green Party’s forestry policy has been in place for almost two decades, with some updates here and there, but based on the sound scientific principles that forestry should do more good than harm. We want to see a genuinely popular model closer to that followed in Germany and other European countries, which increases afforested areas but enhances rather than degrades the communities in which the trees exist. It is a model that prioritises continuous growth, which means that all the trees are not cut down in one massive cull rather harvested selectively, over time, and leaving continuous broadleaf cover in place. Broadleaf forests made up of natural species would also help restore the natural habitats that existed across Ireland for millennia before the land clearances of the past centuries. In areas of lower value land and high ecological importance, they can be a home for nature, a haven for species under threat and a way of restoring soils, stabilising water flows and preventing flooding and erosion.
There is a great disparity in forest cover between the south east, which enjoys considerable coverage, and the north west, which has almost none bar the commercial plantations of places like Leitrim. This was mentioned by Senator Mulherin. There are commercial and ecological reasons for this and the State may have a role to play in increasing coverage in areas where it might not be profitable for farmers and landowners to do so. State supports and the help of the Common Agricultural Policy, CAP, will be essential in targeting this work, and the Government must do what it can to seek such assistance from the European Union, EU, in the next round of reforms to the CAP. Commissioner Hogan will be in this Chamber tomorrow and I hope to present those points to him as well.
The State also has a role to play in the creation of national parks, as Senator Lawless mentioned, areas in which the primary responsibility of planting and management would be the Government's. Such national parks would be huge natural tourism magnets and a national asset that would benefit Ireland, the global climate and the local communities through employment and leisure areas. It is my belief that we need to be aiming at planting 20,000 ha of such forestry per year, and that we need to be very wary of any strong EU push for biomass for energy, considering the poor delivery of most biomass on climate-related assessment criteria. Second and third generation biomass and biofuels will have a role to play but simple growing for burning is not without significant costs and negatives in almost all existing schemes.
I will conclude by saying that we need a new forestry plan that includes national parks, which stores carbon, restores wildlife, provides recreational access and improves water quality and flood management. We need one that is done in consultation and with the full engagement of local communities, and which takes into account the importance of locals' mental health, sense of community and county pride. With our partners in Europe and a major pivot from short-term profits to long-term social, environmental and economic gain, we can have a forestry policy and some beautiful forests to be proud of.
I have just come from a delivery at the front gate of tens of thousands of signatures to the Oireachtas. It was organised by BirdWatch Ireland, An Taisce and the Irish bee federation. They are here today because of their concerns about the Heritage Bill. Speaking about forestry in Ireland, I often wonder if we take into account the amount of linear forestry running through our landscape, providing a huge benefit to wildlife and ecological services in general. It contributes much economic benefit as well. This is something that should be considered and when the Heritage Bill is discussed, hedgerows should be considered as part of our overall forestry capacity.
The planting of large areas of land with trees driven by grant aid and annual payments to landowners has to be examined for its overall impact on communities and long-term impact on the land and the environment. Most of the forests in Ireland are planted on marginal land in areas of the west and north west, where heavier soils and wetter climate limit profitable agricultural options. Many experts point out that this land is simply not productive farmland and forestry offers the best return to the farmer, mainly due to the grants. It also solves the country's carbon sequestration obligations. Some of this is correct but negative realities must be addressed simultaneously.
The general model of forestry in Ireland is the planting of large expanses of Sitka spruce trees, and the total area of Sitka spruce in my area of Donegal is the second highest of all counties in the State. The trees are planted very close together in rows, with open drainage shores running between them. The Department's forestry grants cover the full cost of the planting and fencing of the land, and under the scheme, the landowner receives an annual payment of over €500 per hectare for 15 years. If a farmer plants his or her own land, he or she will also continue to receive the basic payment or entitlement under the Common Agricultural Policy, which is usually approximately €200 per hectare on top of the forestry payment.
The reason for very generous Government assistance for forestry is to encourage it as a means of reaching our commitments on climate change, as trees are viewed as the only way to absorb and store carbon. For a farmer struggling to make a living on wet, poor land in the west, it is an attractive option, as indeed it is for investment and pension funds. Land can be bought cheaply and planting it brings the security of State funding and the 15 years of guaranteed payments. As a Government policy, grant-aided monoculture afforestation is successful in getting more land under trees. The permanent change of land use is one of the clear consequences of this policy. However, communities living in areas where forestry is replacing farming as a model of land use suffer negative impacts as there is very little labour involved in growing Sitka spruce. In reality, it closes down the countryside.
Economic and social activity around traditional farming has significant spin-off in the local area, with services being provided to the farm and products and materials traded with the farm. Normal farming activity creates opportunity, which in turn creates more activity. On the other hand, the farm planted with Sitka spruce never needs new gates, fencing or anyone to cut fodder, bale and gather it in, or to plough for reseeding. There are no animals to feed or care for and no need for a vet to look at an animal. There is no need for anyone to upkeep habitat or hedges, fix machinery or maintain sheds.
Above all, a farm on which Sitka spruce is grown needs no farmer to go to the mart to meet other farmers or to call on neighbours when in need, because there are no needs. The planted farm becomes deserted, wild and uninteresting. The rural community that once survived on the micro-economy delivered in an area by the activity of farming suffers decline and also becomes deserted. The economic activity created by planting, maintaining, thinning and processing conifers is very low as much of the industry is highly automated. It is estimated that there is approximately one full-time job per 1,000 ha of forestry. We, therefore, want a policy that encourages the establishment of local plant nurseries for job creation and to avoid having to import saplings or young trees. For example, a system of credits for buying locally grown trees could be considered.
Farm after farm being planted in an area such as County Leitrim has a major environmental and visual impact which has been ignored, while the genuine complaints of local people are drowned out by the chorus from the State agencies about meeting our afforestation targets for climate change reasons. When marginal land comes up for sale, local farmers who make a living from suckler cows and sheep find it difficult to complete a purchase because they are always outbid by the forestry companies, backed by hedge and pension funds. Another problem created by our afforestation policy is the transfer of land ownership from local farmers to international corporate interests which engage forestry management companies to thin and maintain the forests.
Many farmers who plant the land themselves collect the annual grants for 15 years and are then offered a buyout by the forestry management companies on behalf of big corporate funds when the first thinning is carried out. Such offers are hard to resist for ageing farmers as the next payment from the trees is 15 to 20 years away. This move to corporate ownership of forestry land is happening apace and is supported by Government grants for carbon sequestration reasons. Sinn Féin is calling for a 50-km radius limit for establishment grant and forestry premium payments. This means that the recipient’s main residence must be within 50 km of the forestry site. For companies, the limit should apply to their main headquarters to ensure that the economic benefits of forestry are retained in the local area.
The timber industry in Ireland has been built around the Sitka spruce model of forestry. The harvesting machinery, transport vehicles and the handling equipment in sawmills have all been developed for that type of timber. However much of this fast-growing timber is of low value, with up to 50% of it going for pulp to make paper or for chipping. Some of it is used for chipboard and fibreboard products and some is used as biomass and burned, which releases the carbon absorbed straight back into the atmosphere. Fulfilling our climate change obligations is the reason offered for the high level of grants for forestry but the efficiency and effectiveness of the Sitka spruce forestry model as a carbon sink is in doubt. I ask the Minister of State what studies have been carried out by the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine on the most beneficial crops for sequestration. There are real worries that this model of conifer forestry is not delivering in terms of climate change. Scarce public money is going to support the permanent change of land use to the benefit of an intensive timber industry under the guise of promoting carbon sequestration. The knock-on effect of the forestry industry is a bad outcome for rural communities, with depopulation, declining numbers involved in farming and major changes to the rural landscape. Ireland must move away from the Sitka spruce industrial model of forestry. Where forestry is planted, it should be with a variety of mainly broadleaf species and continual cover such that trees are replanted as they are removed should be ensured.
There must be a fundamental change in policy direction by the Government. The Department is involved in an aggressive afforestation strategy engaging the commercial private sector in a potentially dangerous way. The concentration of forestry in certain geographical areas of mainly marginal land must end. Different uses and management of land by farmers to absorb carbon more affectively must be developed and supported. I would be obliged if the Minister of State would address the concerns raised by my party and I as well as the suggested policy solutions put forward by my party.
I am conscious of the time, so I will be brief and not repeat what has been said. We have had five meaningful and engaging contributions to the debate and I acknowledge the Minister of State will not have time to answer all the questions that have been put, so I will only comment on the matter. I warmly welcome the Minister of State. What could be nicer than to have responsibility for food, forestry and horticulture and also come from the lovely County Wicklow. I regularly walk in Avondale, which as all Members know was the home of Charles Stewart Parnell. While walking there last Sunday I was struck by the vision and foresight for forestry of Parnell and his great contemporary, Horace Plunkett. They had a vision of setting up a forestry school, engaging with foresters and taking young people out of school, probably predominantly young men at that time although there are now men and women in this profession. It is to that approach that we must return. We must discuss their vision.
I acknowledge the work of Coillte, which gets a lot of stick but runs a very slick, professional and commercially viable operation. It is the custodian of over 440,000 ha, which is an enormous block of land and forestry. Over the past 30 years it has built on that and focused on maximising the financial business model. It is now also beginning to address the social model in regard to how we can exploit this amazing national and natural resource. The sustainability of forests and communities, in particular rural communities, is key. I acknowledge what the Irish Natura and Hill Farmers Association has been championing in regard to some of the work in Leitrim because I have been on-site there and have seen the mass blanket of forestry. I have heard the stories of small farmers with ambition to buy another few fields but who have not been able to do so, predominantly because they had to compete with the private forestry sector which wishes to continue to grow its business. I have no problem with people growing their business but it must be done in a sustainable manner.
I acknowledge that Coillte has a very good graduate training programme but it must expand to accommodate transition year students and allow young secondary school students to access placements because we must engender a love for the business of forestry and horticulture.
Greater emphasis should be placed on nursery stock production because we all know that if one does not have good quality healthy seed and nursery stock initially to plant, one will not reap the benefits of that forestry. That is of particular importance. I would like greater possibilities and that student internships and internship programmes are maximised. The Minister of State should consider that.
I will not talk too much about carbon credits but I read a paper this morning by Fine Gael MEP, Seán Kelly, who has done an extraordinary amount of work in the European Parliament in respect of carbon credits and has been slowly and quietly advocating for them.
We should concentrate on training and apprenticeship and consider bringing people to this country to become involved in forestry or allow those who are here trying to be processed and who want to learn a new trade to do so in forestry. Let us prepare for the future because if we must expand the forestry cover of in this country, we must also expand and develop the work force and knowledge base.
Forestry in Ireland must include some broadleaf trees but many Members know that the growing of broadleafs, such as oak is a very long process. I recently walked through an oak forest in Delgany. Those trees are over 200 years old and less than half the height of this building. They are slow to grow and are a very long-term project. Their growth should be encouraged but there must be a balance between sustainability and viability.
Senator Mac Lochlainn's point in terms of acknowledging the pressures that small rural communities are coming under as a result of blanket forestry is well made.
I say well done to the Minister of State and thank him for his ongoing engagement in this matter.
I thank all Senators for their contributions. In response to Senator Boyhan's comments, most of the people I come across in the Department, within the industry and in the wider forestry sector have a passion about it. I must declare an interest at this point; my son is in his final year of forestry at University College Dublin. Last week they were in the Black Forest looking at the whole aspect of continuous cover forestry.
In a few weeks I will travel to the Finnish Forest Research Institute, where the main species of trees are birch and the conifers, Norway and Scots pine. There are a lot of things we need to get into context. In my opening statement I tried to cover all areas of the economic, social and environmental benefits. If people take the time to study what has actually transpired from the mid-term review and some of the other work we are doing with the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, and with others around framework directives, they will see that there is a comprehensive policy. All plantations, following the mid-term review, have a minimum of 15% broadleaf. They can be put in a position and located. Every forest site will have to be managed individually. They can act as buffers along aqua zones when closer to houses, and as scenic areas. In reality, if the conifer plantation is part of it then it can be incorporated behind all of that.
Senator Wilson spoke of a number of places. In Kingscourt, at the Old Cabra estate in his area, a significant amount of money has been invested with the NeighbourWood scheme. We will continue to invest in these and others. I was at one of the NeighbourWood schemes in Balla, County Mayo. There is another one around the Vartry Reservoir at Roundwood. A drone has captured footage of what has happened since before it opened. It is located around the scenic lakes and it incorporates some 20 km of walkways so there is a lot of work being done on that whole area.
With regard to the green ribbon campaign and the Let's Talk and Walk events, I have been on a couple of these walks at Avondale House Forest Park. People have said that we should do more of these but part and parcel of the experience is that it encourages people to get out and about. It is a primer in many ways. On one of the occasions that I went out - I am a Wicklow man all right - I knew the former forest manager who was passionate about the history of Avondale. He conducted a walk and gave us the whole history of the initiatives that took place there in the early part of the 20th century. He also told us about Samuel Hayes, the original owner, who wrote the definitive book on forestry in Ireland back in the late 18th century.
Senator Lawless spoke of those who think one can just plant trees and forget about them. This was a symptom of the early days - in the late 1980s and early 1990s - of the afforestation programme. The target then was to get 10,000 ha planted. At this stage we have 21,000 private landowners. This is 48% and heading to 50% of the total forest estate that will be in private ownership. Last year we had a pilot project on knowledge transfer groups where 270 to 280 farmers took part. There is another pilot scheme on forest certification. We hope to roll out both of these pilots over the next period and it is part and parcel of the programme in the mid-term review.
With regard to tax provisions, premia and revenue received from forestry is free from capital gains for income tax. Previously it was taxable at €80,000. I am aware that some people have a problem with the replanting obligation but it is there because the owner has been given those tax incentives to promote it. Our target is to increase afforestation cover. It would seem wrong that having been a recipient of all those supports one could walk away and be able to restore the land to non-forestry uses.
I have been to Leitrim a number of times. I say this because it has come up on a number of occasions. There are some 500 jobs supported by the wood sector and it is one of the biggest employers in the area. Masonite is located there as are saw millers and hauliers. Some 380 farmers receive €2 million per year in premium payments. The north west has Masonite and ECC, which is just across the border from Mayo in Galway. These facilities have the biggest sawmills and timber processing standalone plants in the State. I do not have the figures but they are probably the biggest consumers of the wood product. Senators Grace O'Sullivan and Pádraig Mac Lochlainn made the point about the production of timber for biomass energy. It is a secondary product. It is not the main product in most cases. Forestry for fibre is a case in point for the likes of the plant that Senator Mulherin mentioned. The forestry for fibre grants have increased significantly, and they have extended from ten to 15 years, to encourage that use. With the combination of the renewable heat incentive scheme we hope it encourages a far greater uptake. I believe it is a way of working with local communities for combined heat and power plants, especially for high demand heat industries and businesses.
I will now turn to the issue of Coillte and the landowners' payments. In fairness, Coillte has put its hands up and said there was a serious lack of communication. It has presented to me on 6 February and to the committee some time after that. Coillte has engaged KPMG and it has said that nobody who was owed money under those contracts is now owed money and that they have communicated directly with everyone involved. There was an amount of work that had been lax in its management structures, a fact that has been acknowledged by Coillte.
Going back to Leitrim, 27% of Leitrim is covered in broadleaf forest. In 2016 the average holding was 25 ha and the average plantation was 6 ha. This puts it into context. I acknowledge that some of the older plantations are blanket cover. As I have already outlined, if and when those various plantations are clear-felled they will have different setback areas, different species mix and the network of roads within the area will also create open spaces. Between the time they close in and the first thinning it is true that plantations from year seven to year 18 do look like blanket coverage, but the introduction to every plantation of the 15% broadleaf - as opposed to 10% - and with up to 15% biodiverse areas it will fundamentally change the appearance of it.
I come from a county with the highest density of plantations. I am surrounded by it and I planted some myself on marginal land. I go back to the point that the real basic aspect is that we want people to consider farming as part of their enterprise; not an either-or situation. It is really the only way we can get the afforestation numbers up. I accept that in some parts of the State it may seem attractive. Non-farmers are defined as sons and daughters or brothers and sisters of farmers, or retired farmers. In 2016 only 126 ha was planted by what we would define as corporate. There is an issue around the semi-mature plantations being bought and people selling. In some ways they are not realising the value of what they have.
That is why the knowledge transfer, the forest felling tool and all of those supports, and the encouragement of producer groups, are being supported by the Department to make people aware of it. The Coillte partnerships were the first departure along the lines of some form of equity release post premia and then a share of the clear-fell revenue. I think there is space and a real opportunity to make that work so that people do not sell themselves short. It is not in the State's interest for timber to be clear-felled prematurely, because the amount of investment by the State is based on getting the maximum yield, be that in year 30, 35 or 40, or much longer in the case of broadleaves. It is in everybody's interests that we would support that and let forest owners know that there are options other than just washing their hands of it in the sense of wanting to get out once they have got the premium. That is a mistake. In Scandinavia in particular all farmers have some plantation and they see that as part of their farm enterprise but they have a tradition that we do not have so they have a greater understanding. That is something we must encourage and support.
Senator Mac Lochlainn and another speaker made a point about continuous cover forestry. Under the mid-term review, the woodland improvement scheme and the native woodland conservation scheme incorporate continuous cover forestry for mixed broadleaves in particular. They are eligible for three woodland improvement scheme payments of €750 for three separate interventions over a period of 12 years, once the work is in line with the approved transformation under the continuous cover for forest plan. It has been recognised, and to go back to the opening statement, we have introduced the new mid-term review changes to the scheme with the full approval of DG Environment in Europe. The officials were put to the sword on this one and were very anxious that we would get broadleaf plantations up to 30%. The mid-term review has addressed a lot of the concerns that existed.
On the one hand we had people saying it was disappointing that we had not reached 10,000 ha while on the other hand we had people concerned about the location and density more so than the amount. One of the issues that has been very apparent from the challenges in increasing the numbers is that the fear on broadleaves was of not being able to get them established, so the protections that are there for broadleaves such as deer fencing and tree protection covers are specifically to deal with that. On the other hand, more particularly with conifer plantations, competing uses have been the biggest challenge. We have 21,000 landowners who have planted so we are working off a diminishing platform. We have gone from 1.5% to 10.5%. We want to get to 18% but it is like trying to knock seconds off a world record. One gets down to fractions of seconds and then hundreds of seconds, so one is working off a diminishing platform. That is probably the biggest single reason we have not been able to reach the figures. It is one of them anyway. The agritaxation changes have made it very attractive to lease land for 15 years plus, so it is comparable. In general, there is enough land for everything, appropriately placed. There is enough land to reach the target of 30% broadleaves with conifers as the driver of the economic part.
In terms of sequestration, both conifers and broadleaves on maturity store about the same amount of carbon. In a way, the difference is that conifers reach maturity quicker, then they have a harvest and replant so there is a net impact in that regard. I gave the figures on carbon storage earlier. It is in everybody's best interests - economic, social and environmental, that we support this programme - that programmes will follow in 2021 and that we will continue in this vein.
We have an open mind if there are problems. I have spoken to representative groups from all quarters - the Irish Natura and Hill Farmers Association, INHFA, the Irish Farmers' Association, IFA, foresters, the promotion people and everybody else. In the mid-term review we had a consultation period and everybody was entitled to make a submission on it. We have tried our best to address all of the concerns and at the same time to encourage afforestation.
I have a list of the promotional events we organised. We had 21 information days. We sent mailshots to 4,000 forest owners with a new afforestation leaflet. We did radio advertising. I have done a series of interviews, some of which were more challenging than others. The Department produced a newsletter. We have Farm TV, and we were responsible for miscellaneous articles in various publications. We are trying to raise awareness. It is about going back to the farmer, the landowner, which brings in rural communities. This is meant to be part of the farm enterprise. Farmers must profile their own farm and work out if some of it could yield them money, and build an asset which would yield a return to them or their successors and allow them to enhance the remainder of the farm without compromising the productivity of the conventional farming enterprise. I think it can and I think that is something we should look at.
I referred to a farm of 25 ha where 6 ha was planted, which is a quarter. That is probably typical although in some places it might be less and in other places more. I would encourage people to get behind afforestation and look at the facts and the reality. The debate does get very passionate in parts of the country. I appreciate that. I have done my best not to provoke anybody, but I come from a county that has a higher tree density than anywhere else in the country so I have some authority in being able to speak about the experience. We have had a culture of afforestation since the 1950s. We have had sawmills and people working in timber, garden sheds, post and rail mills for structural wood production and people working with what is now Coillte. It has been part and parcel of what I grew up with, although I accept it may be different for others. It is something that can be of benefit if it is managed correctly.
I thank the Minister of State, Deputy Doyle. I welcome Senator Mark Daly and his guest to the Gallery.
Sitting suspended at 2.10 p.m and resumed at 2.30 p.m.