Ms Geraldine O'Sullivan:

Regarding the Natura impact statement, there is a minimum associated cost with that of €1,000, which increases depending on the scale of the forest. We have heard figures of up to €20,000 from farmers, depending on the interaction with Natura sites. The minimum, however, is €1,000 and I think that would cover it. The issue is that even if a forest does not require an NIS, an NIS is required just to get into the system now. It seems to be a major waste of resources that it is necessary to submit an NIS even if a forest has been screened by the Department as not requiring an NIS. I am dealing, therefore, with farmers who are paying that €1,000 and they might have a site of 2 ha. That is absolutely undermining any kind of reality.

In addition, to try to solve the objections initially, the harvesting plan with increased environmental technicality was introduced by the Department. There is a minimum cost of applying for that of €500. What this time two years ago, therefore, was a zero-cost application for a farmer now costs a minimum of €1,500. That is because the forestry companies can no longer take the cost, which they did in the past because they had turnover, they knew they would have got the timber out and they could have entered into an arrangement with a farmer in that regard. Now, however, there is a minimum cost to get an application into the system of €1,500, and that is being done even when an NIS is not required.

That is the basis upon which we want the grant to be introduced. I refer to legislative costs having increased and not any costs by forestry companies or commercial costs. We would like to see some supports in respect of the increased harvesting plan requirements. I also refer to it now being obligatory to have an NIS, whether it is required or not. There should be some supports in that regard as well. The reality is that screening under the habitats directive was instituted to determine if the forestry operation on its own, or in combination, would have a significant impact.

It is our view that small-scale farm forestry will not have a significant impact and that is why we have proposed that we look at the thresholds in this context. It is standard practice, and we do it in planning all the time where thresholds are introduced where that is not required. In the context of the ambitions of this Government, in particular, we think this is essential. If we want to have more trees and farms, that situation must be reviewed.