Changes to the definition of an ‘active farmer’ in the mid-term review of the Forestry Programme risked funnelling millions of euros into the coffers of corporate investors, those opposed to the move have claimed.

The warnings followed a Dáil admission by the Minister for Agriculture, Martin Heydon, that non-farmers and other applicants secured 54% of actual planting payments in 2025 and 50% in 2026.

Minister Heydon was responding to questions from the Independent TD for Offaly, Carol Nolan.

ADVERTISEMENT

Non-farmers were eligible for forestry premiums for 15 years but changes to the ‘active farmer’ definition mean that payments could be extended to 20 years – as is currently the case for farmers – where a forestry applicant can show that they were in BISS for one year rather than for four years as was previously the case.

Deputy Nolan claimed that the changes to the ‘active farmer’ definition “opened the door to greater corporate involvement in Irish forestry” at the expense of “genuine farm families”.

“We were promised a farmer-first forestry policy, yet these changes risk doing the opposite,” she said.

“Family farms and rural communities are deeply worried about land speculation and corporate investors sweeping up forestry premiums,” the Offaly TD maintained.

“However, there is now a strong argument that Government has made it easier for non-active farmers and companies to qualify for the lucrative 20-year afforestation premiums, while part-time, transitional, and smaller family farms could be squeezed out,” Deputy Nolan argued.

The Offaly TD called on Minister Heydon to put “strong safeguards in place” to ensure that the 20-year premium is reserved for “genuine active farmers”, and particularly for “young farmers and those inheriting family holdings”.

“Forestry incentives should support rural communities and food production, not become another investment vehicle for outsiders,” Deputy Nolan insisted.

The Offaly TD’s reservations regarding the changes to the ‘active farmer’ definition were shared by ICMSA.

The association’s deputy president Eamon Carroll accused the Government of facilitating the “soaking up” of forestry premium payments by pension funds and other corporate entities.

“We have only recently called for a definition of an ‘active farmer’ for the purposes of CAP that rests on a stocking rate of one livestock unit per hectare for grassland and that is because ICMSA is very conscious of the fact that schemes and policies that were originally designed and set up for farmers have been steadily infiltrated and then dominated by non-farmers and corporations,” said Carroll.

“Nowhere is this damaging phenomenon more evident than forestry where the Government seems much happier dealing with pension funds and corporations and directing premiums to them,” he maintained.

“Any benefits to local communities are hugely reduced by this tactic and it also ensures that Ireland’s overall forestry sector remains underdeveloped,” Carroll said.

However, criticism of changes to the ‘active farmer’ definition were rejected by Minister Heydon.

“Rather than being a disadvantage, I am confident that the removal of the four-year BISS requirement will help to reduce barriers for genuine farmers and new entrant farmers to engage in forestry, whilst keeping a protective mechanism in place to ensure that the farmer differential is targeted appropriately,” Minister Heydon claimed.