Mr. Donal Whelan:

The ITGA was established in 1977 to provide information and representation services for timber growers throughout the country. The membership of the association mirrors the wide range of timber growers and the current membership includes farm forest owners, forestry co-operative members, private woodland estates, forestry investors and forestry pension funds. The 2014 forest industry yearbook, as circulated to the committee, is an example of one of our publications and contains statistics and information on the industry. We encourage committee members to consult it.

In considering the Forestry Bill it is important to look at the forestry and timber sector and its many attributes. While Mr. Fleming has gone through some of them, I will outline the main points again.

We must bear in mind that in the last three decades those involved in the private sector were strongly encouraged by the Government to plant their lands which they were giving up from other agricultural activities. This happened to such an extent that, effectively, all afforestation in the past decade has been undertaken by private sector growers with their own land. When one considers that 42% to 43% of the European Union's land area is under forest, the most recent forest inventory for Ireland which was launched just last month by the Minister of State, Deputy Tom Hayes, showed that only 10.5% of Ireland's land area was under forest. This is despite the fact that in Ireland trees grow considerably faster than in most other European countries.

The forestry industry is very important to the economy and an emerging industry. Total annual output is approximately €2.2 billion, with 90% of output from the panel board industry being exported, with some 60% of Irish sawmill output. In addition, in terms of the environment, the contribution to tackling climate change by Irish forests absorbing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere is approximately 4 million tonnes of carbon dioxide annually, or about 6% of our total greenhouse gas emissions. The Council for Forest Research and Development has stated maintaining the climate change benefits of Irish forests will require continuation of the national afforestation programme at a rate exceeding 15,000 ha per annum in the next two decades. In six of the last seven years, however, we planted under 7,000 ha per annum, which it is important to note.

Forestry is a significant employer in rural areas and, if the Bill is put in place and amended as we believe it is important to do, it can be a catalyst for further employment in the sector. After wind energy, wood fuel is the largest contributor to renewable energy generation in Ireland. Again, there are implications for this if the level of afforestation falls below 15,000 ha. Annual visitor numbers to Irish forests have been estimated at in excess of 18 million, another very important attribute of the sector. Moreover, forest plantations provide suitable habitat for a wide range of native flora and fauna and make a positive contribution to biodiversity conservation. Much good research demonstrating this has been undertaken and funded by the Council for Forest Research and Development. Unfortunately, the Bill, as drafted, is likely to have a negative effect on afforestation rates and employment in the sector, with wider consequences for climate change, renewable energy generation, recreation and biodiversity. Confidence in the future of the forestry sector is critical and the Bill must play a central role in building this confidence.

While we have circulated our formal submission, I would like to raise some specific points in this regard. The first concerns potential financial losses for growers. Under the Bill, the Minister effectively will have the right to refuse a felling licence to somebody in the private sector who has been growing his or her plantation for many years. However, the legislation does not provide for appropriate reimbursement for the grower's financial loss. Therefore, the Minister is being empowered to refuse a felling licence for the area where the grower has been trying to make a financial return for his or her family and, possibly, his or her pension fund, but there is no requirement for the State to reimburse the grower for his or her loss. This is a critical issue. As we have seen, all planting is now effectively undertaken by the private sector. If we want to encourage the private sector to plant more, with all of the benefits that come from that, it is important that this issue be tackled.

Reimbursement for financial loss must also be provided for where legislation or regulations involve, direct or authorise the destruction of a grower’s trees. The Bill states the Minister can effectively require the destruction of a grower's tress without reimbursement for loss. The risk that a grower may not receive a felling licence for a forest crop owing to environmental or other reasons is a source of real concern. We have no issue with the environmental reasons or the Minister not giving a felling licence as long as the woodland owner is reimbursed for his or her loss. That is the important point. The potential risk of this occurring is increasing. As I said, the national forest inventory, NFI, was launched last month by the Minister of State, Deputy Tom Hayes. It showed that over half, or 51%, of the national forest area had one or more environmental designation in the reference year of 2012, compared to 43% in the 2006 NFI results. Therefore, the area of forest with one or more environmental designations increased by 8% of the forest area in the intervening six years. While that is not the issue, I draw the attention of the committee to the point that if there are such environmental designations, there is a risk the Minister may, for whatever reason, decide a felling licence may not be granted for a particular area, which would represent a very significant loss for the timber grower.