Forestry groups turned up in force at the National Ploughing Championships last week after an initial threat to boycott the event due to what one forestry company representative described as a “totally inadequate programme”. So, what are the contentious issues in the 2014-20 forestry programme?

Grants

While most welcomed the increase in grant rates over the existing scheme, forestry companies pointed out that when the comparisons are drawn between the scheme initiated in 2007 and the new scheme, there are major reductions (Table 2). Grant rates for broadleaves remain at existing levels but are down by between 20% and 29% compared with 2007. However, reduced stocking – plants per hectare – needs to be factored in, which reduces establishment costs. That said, an increase of at least 4% would have been expected in a programme that will conclude in 2020.

Parity, or near parity, has been maintained for conifers except for afforestation on unenclosed land. Grant rates for planting have increased by 3% for grant/premium categories (GPCs) 2, 3 and 4. However, the grant for GPC 1 (unenclosed land), while increased by 4% over existing levels, is still 27% below 2007 levels. Representatives of forestry companies maintained that grants for planting unenclosed land need to have least parity with GPC 2.

Premia

The premium differential rate between areas of less than and over 8ha has caused some debate. The existing programme has the same premium rates regardless of the size of area planted. The 2007 programme had three premium categories: up to 6ha; 6ha to 12ha; and 12ha and over.

The reasoning behind a marginal premium increase for planting over 8ha is to encourage larger planting lots. It would make sense if the Department also encouraged planting on productive unenclosed land to allow more farmers to achieve the larger premium by establishing more viable large-scale forests on mixtures of enclosed and unenclosed land.

In addition, forestry companies believe that the new annual premium of €170/ha (€2,550 over 15 years) is unacceptable when compared with the 2009 programme of €241/ha, or €4,820, over 20 years for unenclosed land.

The removal of differential premium rates between farmers and non-farmers has been opposed by the IFA, while many forestry companies believe it is not a major issue and may have benefits for farmers and new forestry investors. While all stakeholders believed that the reduction of the premium period from 20 to 15 years (Table 1) was a retrograde step, especially for broadleaved afforestation, most of those contacted felt that it was inevitable and are unlikely to pursue it during negotiations.

Forest roads

The Irish Timber Growers Association has welcomed the new roading grants. Forestry companies are broadly supportive but a number have said that there are aspects that need renegotiation. There are a number of changes to the scheme in relation to the area of eligibility and the timing of payments, while a grant of up to €5,000 for special construction works is proposed as well as support for connecting new roads to the existing forest road network.

Tree improvement

Despite some excellent work carried out on tree improvement programmes over the years, Ireland still hasn’t achieved a viable home seed source for a number of major species (Table 3). The measure dealing with genetic reproductive material in the new programme will support the conservation of native forest genetic material and improve the resilience of Irish forest species to disease and the effects of climate change.

The proposed measure will provide support towards the costs related to the management and conservation of registered seed stands and production areas, such as seed orchards.

However, the establishment of seed orchards and tree improvement programmes needs to take cognisance of the needs of all in the wood chain to avoid the disconnect between the grower and the marketplace.

“Our proposal is that a steering group be established to include nursery owners, growers and timber processors to make informed and objective decisions on what material we should use to stock our seed orchards to fulfil the huge potential of our forests,” said John McCarthy, of None-so-Hardy Nurseries.

While Ireland is self sufficient in seed for a number of species, virtually all the seed required for Sitka and Norway spruce is imported. “Clearly, there is a need to be less reliant on imported sources of seed and plants, particularly in relation to oak and Sitka spruce,” the programme maintains.