Michael Healy-Rae (Kerry, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

439. To ask the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine his views on the reintroduction of farm forest premium differentials; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [43927/17]

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The current forestry programme does not differentiate between a “farmer” and “non-farmer” but targets funding at all landowners who wish to convert lands to forestry. It is important to note that the non-farmer category also includes recently retired farmers and the family members of existing farmers and on that basis I am satisfied that the vast bulk of forestry payments remain in rural Ireland. Reinstating the farmer/non-farmer forest premium differential is not an option being considered by the Department.

The reintroduction of such a differential could only be achieved either by an increase in the farmer rate or a reduction in the non-farmer rate. An increase in the premium rate for farmers is no guarantee of increased planting levels by farmers. The other option of reducing the non-farmer rate to create the differential could impact significantly on overall planting levels. This is borne out by planting figures in 2016 where the proportion of land planted by landowners classifying themselves as non-farmers was 36%.

The Forestry Programme 2014-2020 will continue to pay the same premium to all landowners to ensure that the maximum amount of land is available for afforestation. All lands proposed for afforestation are assessed to the same silvicultural and environmental criteria irrespective of who owns the lands.

Michael Healy-Rae (Kerry, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

440. To ask the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if there is a way to proportionally compensate farmers for the land they are obliged to set aside for environmental enhancement; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [43928/17]

Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I understand that this question relates to land set aside as part of a forestry application. I believe the existing provisions to pay landowners for areas left unplanted for environmental reasons are proportionate and adequate.

Under the current Environmental Requirements for Afforestation, between 10-15% of the afforestation site must be treated with particular regard to biodiversity, comprising a combination of open spaces and retained habitats and this includes setbacks beside habitats, watercourses, setbacks beside public roads and archaeological monuments that are not planted.

Up to 15% of this land set aside as Areas for Biodiversity Enhancement or ABE’s as they are known are fully eligible for grant and premium payments.

Where the area within an application has many areas not planted for environmental reasons, the Department under the afforestation scheme is limited to only paying on that amount of the unplanted area that amounts to 15% of the total project area. Situations do exist where, due to multiple sensitivities, the amount of area eligible for payment may exceed the 15% eligible area threshold, resulting in a landowner receiving a payment based on an area less than the gross area of the project. However, these represent a minority of cases and often, with good design, these ineligible areas can be excluded from the afforestation application and left as part of the open farm enterprise.