Mr. Brian Rushe:

I thank the committee for inviting us to this session. We are here today to highlight some concerns farmers have regarding Ireland’s future forest strategy, particularly the barriers that exist and which have seen a dramatic decline in farmer planting in recent years. Due to time constraints I will pick some key points in our statement.

It is important to recognise that farmers will be crucial to the success of the future forest strategy. Agricultural land accounts for approximately 65% of the total area of Ireland and farmers will ultimately decide the production systems implemented on their farms. Farmer planting peeked in 1995 at over 17,000 ha, but has been in sharp decline since. This has especially been the case since 2015. In 2021, farmers planted 360 ha of forestry nationally, accounting for just 18% of the planting programme of approximately 2,000 ha. Investor or non-farmer planting accounted for 82% of the planting programme.

The decline in farmer planting and corresponding increase in investor planting can be linked to the equalisation of premium rates for farmers and non-farmers in 2015. Under the previous forestry programme, the non-farmer premium rate increased by 65% while the farmer premium payment was maintained at the same rate but paid over 15 years instead of 20 years. This shift in policy to significantly increase incentives for investors while farmer premiums were maintained but the term of payment was reduced by five years seriously undermined farmer confidence in the programme. This development, combined with a range of other issues that reduced the area of land available for forestry and increased the regulatory burden and associated management costs, can be linked to the sharp decline in farmer planting.

Turning to the barriers to farm forestry, the reality is that many farmers no longer view forestry as a safe investment. Under legislation, they are locked in under the replanting obligation while they have seen their productive area continually eroded with evolving environmental regulations and a regulatory system that is impeding management and reducing profitability. The lack of support for farmers affected by ash dieback disease has made others wary of entering forestry under the current terms and conditions. The recently announced €1.3 billion in funding under the new Forestry Programme 2023-2027 shows a financial commitment from the Government to forestry.

The increase in forest premium rates and the return to a 20-year premium payment for farmers are positive steps and have generated renewed interest in forestry but barriers remain and need to be resolved if that interest is to be converted into land planted. Despite the work that has been ongoing through Project Woodland, including the regulatory review report and the consultations on the draft forest strategy and implementation plan, many of the substantive barriers to farmer planting remain. If farmers are to re-engage and plant at the level required to meet our climate obligations, in excess of 8,000 ha per year, the outstanding issues that are deterring farmers from planting need to be addressed.

The current licensing system is not fit for purpose for farm forests and places too high a regulatory and cost burden on farmers considering forestry at farm level. A proportionate regulatory burden that reflects the size and type of operation and guarantees a decision within an agreed timeframe is urgently needed. One of the greatest barriers to planting is the replanting obligation. This must be reviewed and options proposed if planting targets are to be met. The non-productive areas of forests planted under the afforestation scheme has increased to 35%, comprising 20% broadleaf planting and 15% areas for biodiversity enhancement, with no payment to farmers on this land beyond the 20-year forest premium. This needs to be addressed. A payment for ecosystem services must be paid for engaging in good biodiversity management practice within these areas.

The treatment of forest owners whose ash plantations have been devastated by disease has undermined confidence and trust in the programme. Until this is properly addressed and the loss of timber earnings recognised, farmers will not commit their land to forestry. The IFA is seeking for all infected plantations to be eligible for a 100% reconstitution grant and paid a forest premium for 20 years on the replanted land to compensate for the financial loss incurred. A voluntary carbon scheme must be introduced to pay farmers for the carbon sequestered within their forests.

Following the recent announcement of the establishment of the Irish strategic forestry fund by Gresham House and Coillte, the realities of how the Government intends to deliver the afforestation strategy have become more apparent to farmers and rural communities. The fund is very much the first step of Coillte’s plan to plant 100,000 ha of new forests, as set out in its strategic vision. Farmers and rural communities are rightly concerned that a large proportion of the €1.3 billion in funding under the forestry programme will be redirected away from farmers and rural communities and instead paid out to investors. These concerns are grounded in reality, as evidenced by investor planting accounting for 41% of planting between 2015 and 2020, with that percentage rising year on year. The socioeconomic impact on rural communities of this level of investor planting is unknown, particularly in areas where there is a high concentration of investor planting within townlands. The increase in investor planting has corresponded with a growing level of opposition to forestry nationally, as farmers and rural communities see neighbouring land being bought up by invisible investors, with the vast majority of the premiums funded by the Exchequer and earnings from future timber sales leaving the local economy and providing minimal downstream benefits to local businesses and communities. This is an unsustainable forestry model. The level of supports provided by the Government to non-farmers needs to be reviewed. There is strong demand in the agricultural land market and limited supply. Continued support of investors has the potential to further impact land prices and availability, increasing the competition for land. Steps must be taken to ensure that private investors in forestry do not disrupt an already heated land market. The focus of future forest policy must be to prioritise supporting farm forestry to meet afforestation targets. This optimises the multiple benefits that will ensure vibrant rural areas with thriving populations.

Despite the announcement in November 2022, the new forestry programme is not operational and no new applications for afforestation and forest roads can be accepted. The delay will have a considerable impact on the afforestation and the wider forestry sector. The average turnaround times for afforestation licences in 2022 was 18 months. Based on these turnaround times, even if state aid approval is received at the end of quarter 3 in 2023, a farmer who applies to plant would have to wait until October 2024 to get a decision on the planting application. This is an untenable situation. The current average turnaround times for afforestation licences are 4.5 times the legal requirement of four months. Changes need to be made to the current licensing system to streamline and speed up turnaround times for afforestation and all forest licence applications. The system must guarantee that a farmer has to wait no longer than four months for a decision on a forestry licence, as set out in the Forestry Act 2014.

Finally, I wish to raise the issue of the growing concern among farmers regarding the number of roadside ash trees infected with ash dieback disease. Farmers feel aggrieved that they are now being held solely responsible for the safe removal of these diseased roadside trees but the Department did not have adequate controls in place to stop the importation of infected plants. The IFA is seeking the introduction of a financial support package that would enable farmers and landowners to safely manage infected roadside ash trees and reduce the risk of injury. Safely removing these trees is costly and needs to be co-ordinated at a local level with local authorities.

If confidence is to be restored and farmers are to plant at the scale required to meet climate obligations, the Government needs to address the legacy issues preventing farmer from planting. It must provide assurances to farmers and rural communities that farmer-based solutions that strive to protect farmers rights are implemented to support the national afforestation targets being met.