Mr. Michael Fleming:

I present apologies on behalf of our president who was due to be here today, but, unfortunately, he had to attend a meeting in Brussels.

I thank the joint committee for giving us this opportunity to outline the IFA’s concerns about the proposed Forestry Bill 2013 which, if passed in its current format, will be extremely detrimental to the expansion of the sector, greatly reduce farmer involvement in the afforestation programme and deter mobilisation of the private timber resource. I am accompanied by Mr. Enda Monaghan and Ms Deirdre O’Shea, our forestry secretary.

The IFA supports the need to update the Forestry Act 1946 to reflect the scale of private sector involvement and support the development of a modern forestry sector. The expansion of the sector is dependent on farmer involvement and the Bill should create a legislative framework that will support farm level timber production, as well as satisfying the multifunctional aspects of forests. It would be useful to provide a brief summary of the forest resource.

The total forest area in Ireland in 2012 was 730,000 ha or 10.5% of the land area. This compares with a European average of 43%. A total of 47% of the forest area is in private ownership. Counties with the highest proportion of forest area are primarily distributed along the western and south-western seaboards. Nearly 17,000 farmers have invested in forestry. The farm forest resource is fragmented, with an average plantation size of 8 ha. The age distribution of these forests is young; most of them were established in the past two decades, with approximately 20% entering production stage.

The socio-economic importance of the forest resource is significant but often underestimated. The forestry and forest products sector contribute €2.2 billion to the economy. Forests contribute to rural development and the sector provides 16,000 jobs. Ireland possesses the climate and soils to grow forests at a faster rate than most other European countries, yet we fail to exploit our natural advantage, with afforestation rates falling in recent years to the lowest in over 25 years, despite our national strategic plan of 17% forest cover by 2035. In 2013 only 6,200 ha of new forest were established, well below the sustainable level of 15,000 ha per annum required to achieve the strategic plan. In the past three years we have consistently failed to plant the 7,000 ha budgetary allocation for the afforestation programme. A combination of policy and funding measures has undermined farmer confidence in the forestry programme in recent years and contributed to the decline. Production from the national forest estate is forecast to more than double to 7 million m3 by 2028, with almost all of the increase in supply to come from the private forest estate. The mobilisation of the private forest resource at the scale required to achieve these targets represents a major challenge for private forest owners and the forestry sector.

The IFA is concerned that the Bill, if enacted without significant amendments, will create a restrictive legislative framework that will be extremely detrimental to the expansion of the sector. The primary reason farmers plant trees is to produce and sell a timber crop to realise the best potential from their land. There are certain sections within the Bill that will act as a barrier to farmer involvement, increase management costs, impede timber production and reduce the financial return on investment. Private forest owners must have the right to manage their forests in accordance with their own management objectives, as long as the management is consistent with the principles of sustainable forest management. The requirement to submit a management plan which may be approved, rejected, revoked or revised at any stage is an unnecessary barrier to afforestation and the mobilisation of the timber resource. It will increase the administrative burden, management costs associated with an operation and create huge uncertainty for private forest owners.

The Bill proposes to confer wide-ranging powers that will permit the Minister to attach unspecified conditions to, or vary the conditions of, a felling licence, including the power to dictate the type of trees to be replanted or to refuse a felling licence outright without any consideration of the potential financial loss to the forest owner. Forest owners must be compensated for any financial loss incurred if the conditions attached to management plans or felling licences reduce the economic return on investment. To confer such broad functions on the Minister, without regard for the management objectives of the forest owner, creates uncertainty and is a major disincentive to farmers considering forestry as a land use option. In several reports commissioned by the Department the replanting obligation has been cited as a deterrent to the expansion of the forestry sector. The Bill fails adequately to address this issue and the mandatory replanting requirement should be removed. In fact, the Bill goes further and proposes that a felling licence or the replanting order may be registered as a burden on forest land. This is counterproductive to the expansion of the sector and a major deterrent to farmers considering forestry.

Another major concern for farmers is the penalties and extremely draconian powers given to authorised officers for the purposes of enforcement. The penalties and powers being conferred are disproportionate to the possible offences and a serious intrusion on the property and basic rights of landowners. As a farmer who has invested part of my family farm in forestry, I have serious concerns that the Bill will not support me to realise the full potential of my forest. The level of bureaucracy will significantly increase my management costs, from the proposed introduction of fees to the requirement to have a management plan. The power to place unspecified conditions or restrictions on, or to review my management plan at any stage, without any regard for my objectives, is not warranted.

The power to attach conditions or refuse my felling licence without consultation or recompense is unacceptable. I am entitled to be paid compensation if conditions attached to my felling licence reduce my income from timber production. To register the felling licence or replanting order as a burden on my land is an infringement of my property rights and would discourage me from converting any more of my family farm to forestry in the future. The lack of respect for my property or contract rights is unacceptable, from the scope of the power being conferred on authorised officers to the power to seek recoupment of moneys within 20 years of date of breach.

The private forestry sector offers enormous untapped potential. Creating the right legislative framework is key to instilling confidence in farmers and realising the potential of the sector.