Mr. Seamus Dunne:

The Deputy mentioned the harvest plans. A harvest plan is not a legal requirement at application stage. We do not generally get harvest plans from Coillte at that stage. We encourage all applications from private sources and Coillte to supply harvest plans. It is good practice to discuss the harvest plan with the contractors who are doing the work.

For sites that are screened out for appropriate assessment, we assess whether there is a need for a harvest plan. That is for Coillte and private sites; there is no difference. For sites that are screened in, we always look for more detail, up to and including a harvest plan. This is important and Coillte has always provided sufficient information when we sought it.

The Deputy asked whether the information is generic. Is the word “generic” similar for everyone? As Coillte harvests perhaps 1,000 sites annually, there will be a high degree of consistency and standardisation with all of its harvest plans. For each application, it gives us a map of the harvest area and details of what will happen on that site. We are receiving harvest plans for screen-in sites. It is essential. We have clarified this with the sector. We sent circulars to the trade, including the private sector and Coillte, and clarified that harvest plans are essential for screen-in sites. That is for Coillte and the private sector; there is no preferential treatment. Coillte has invested heavily in ecology resources. It has approximately 20 ecologists preparing Natura impact statements, NISs. It produces them to a high standard.

It probably produces more NISs than any other organisation in the country. We get the NISs with harvest plans from Coillte for us to process. It is not fair to say there was preferential treatment with Coillte.