Tom Hayes (Tipperary South, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

Regarding amendment No. 25, forestry management planning is an essential tool which facilitates forest owners and foresters in the planning and scheduling of forest operations. Since the early 1990s, forest management plans have been prepared by foresters in support of grant aided afforestation schemes. These plans have provided forest owners with information on the timing of forest operations such as thinning and maintenance throughout the lifetime of their crops. Plans are also commonplace in other European countries. The section recognises the importance of plans in the management of forest resources sustainability.

Section 6(b) allows the Minister to require the submission of a management plan in support of an approval which includes consented and licensed operations. For example, a plan could be submitted in support of a felling licence application where the approximate timing of thinning and clear felling operations is outlined over the entire lifetime of the crop. In this case, a felling licence could be issued for up to ten years on the basis of a plan submitted, which could also include extensions. If these plans are periodically reviewed by forest owners and foresters, there is nothing to prevent them being used for further licence applications.

Some stakeholders have also raised concerns about the implementation of plans and the powers to set conditions. I stress that conditions attached to plans will be aimed at ensuring forestry operations take place in accordance with good forest practice. For example, if a forest management plan is submitted in support of a felling licence or afforestation application, it will be important the plans take account of environmental considerations. Conditions will only be attached where it is clear that the plan submitted is insufficient. For example, conditions would be required if the plan submitted proposed harvesting an extraction through an archaeological site or if replanting was to take place immediately adjoining a river without an appropriate setback distance being included as this would impact on fish and aquatic species. In such circumstances, conditions would be required as the plans submitted would benefit from the addition of conditions.

Previous amendments to extend the licensing period from five to ten years must be balanced with the provision that a plan submitted in support of a licence application could be amended, particularly where circumstances change. If these provisions were not in place, it would result in licences in the main being of short duration, which is not a desired outcome for the forest owner and Department.

In regard to amendment No. 45, while I appreciate that the Deputies' amendment to substitute "should" for "may" is positive towards forestry management planning, I believe the use of the word "may" is more appropriate in this section and, for this reason, I do not agree with the proposed amendment. Plantation sizes can vary from small to very large and it is important this provision is flexible enough to allow for a selective approach to the requirement for a management plan.

In response to the Deputy's proposed amendment No. 46, I draw his attention to section 10(6) where provision is made for the making of a regulation to provide for the "form, content, duration and implementation of plans". In drafting any such regulations the Minister will always have to have regard to the doctrine of proportionality, in particular that any requirement he proposes would not be disproportionate to the objectives he is seeking to achieve and that the constitutional rights of citizens are protected. Furthermore, such regulations cannot go beyond the principles and policies set down in the Bill.

The intention is to make management plans as user-friendly as possible, and my Department will provide templates to facilitate this process. While I accept the spirit in which the amendment is proposed, I do not think it necessary to include this text.