How did you know what tree species to plant in the old days? We looked around us and we planted the species that were growing best.

And if there were no trees and forests? We planted low nutrient-demanding species, which we hoped would thrive, so that future foresters would learn from your successes and failures – Conversations with a forester (1998).

I was thinking of Myles Cosgrave – the forester I interviewed – when I inspected three forest sites in Co Cork recently. Like a number of foresters I interviewed over the past three decades, he had few research findings or surrounding forests to base his species selection on in the 1930s.

With only 2% forest cover in Ireland at the time, most of the planting was carried out on exposed low-nutrient sites with no nearby trees to reference, so it’s all the more remarkable that the successes far outnumbered the failures.

The foresters I met in Cork, had, thanks to Myles Cosgrave and his fellow pioneering foresters, plenty of surrounding forests to base their species selection. All three sites I visited were located on upland old red sandstone podzols on mainly unenclosed land.

Foresters up until the turn of the century wouldn’t have given a second thought to planting them. Close to 70% of all land planted up until the 1990s was on unenclosed land, mainly in State owned forests. However, the Forest Service introduced a ruling in 2010, which virtually banned afforestation on unenclosed land.

As a result, afforestation on this marginal land decreased to 2% of annual planting, removing 200,000ha of productive forest land from future afforestation.

As the three sites are on mainly unenclosed land, why are foresters once again applying to the Forest Service for planting grant approval in these upland areas? Since the publication of the Land Availability for Afforestation report by COFORD in the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine, a more scientific evaluation of sites was recommended by the authors – Dr Niall Farrelly and Dr Gerhardt Gallagher – using a site classification system. This would be based on a vegetation scoring system.

Vegetation, which indicates soil fertility, moisture levels and other conditions provides an objective analysis of the suitability of sites for afforestation. The higher the value, the greater the productivity and biodiversity potential of the forest crop.

As foresters clearly understand this system it was welcomed because it removed the subjectivity of assessing sites. The vegetation rating system can be carried out by the forester but in large sites, it’s worthwhile employing an independent ecologist to indicate if the site qualifies and what grant and premium category (GPC) afforestation scheme it matches.

Sites with a high percentage of heather, bog cotton and related species will fail to qualify as they won’t reach a rating of 5.

More productive sites with purple moor grass, heath rush and grasses such as sweet vernal are likely to receive a rating of 5 to 6 and qualify as GPC 1.

In areas where there is sufficient spread of wet grassland with soft rush and grasses such as Yorkshire fog, perennial rye grass and red fescue GPC 2 and higher can be achieved which has greater productivity potential, as well as more attractive annual premium payments for the owner. These sites, rated 6 and higher, may also contain bracken, furze and bramble along with isolated trees such as willow and birch.

To find out how this is working in practice I visited sites near Donoughmore, Bweeng and Inchigeelagh, all located in traditionally strong, mostly upland forested areas. One of these sites had been approved for grant aid and planted, one was expected to be approved while the other had been turned town before a vegetation analysis was carried out. In addition to vegetation analysis, I was also interested in inspecting the surrounding forests to see how these were performing.

Cummeen

Cummeen is 3km northwest of Donoughmore, located on the southeastern slopes of the Boggeragh Mountains.

Ger Moroney of Green Belt had prepared an afforestation plan for the site including a vegetation analysis. “It’s an upland mainly unenclosed site with a peat depth less than 50cm,” he said. “The site contains a diverse cover of vegetation, so we are confident that it will produce a crop with a yield class (YC) of 18 to 20 (m3/ha/annum).”

Pointing to Coillte plantations higher up, he is happy that exposure will not be an issue. “Even though the area is just under 10ha, we decided to commission an independent ecologist to carry out a vegetation analysis, which leaves no doubt in anyone’s mind about the vegetation spread.”

The area scored 6.1, which means that it qualifies for GPC3. This is the owner’s and Green Belt’s favoured scheme. The vegetation analysis is a fascinating botanic exercise. Apart from a minor herb layer, 12 main plant and grass species were identified. These included the high-nutrient grass indicators Yorkshire fog, bent and meadow grasses, along with plants such as fern, sorrel and spotted lady’s thumb. A small encroachment of purple moor grass and heather brought the score down but the overall site is comfortably in GPC3.

The site had already been approved as GPC1 but “this is uneconomic to plant as the grant is too low to even break even while the annual premium payments for the owner are not attractive enough,” Ger said.

“We are now confident that the vegetation analysis will bring the site to GPC 3 and the owner is prepared to plant as this will provide a sufficient level of premium payments.”

The site evidence at Cummeen and the performance of the Coillte crop at higher elevations would indicate that the owner will have a highly productive crop yielding income from first thinning shortly after premium payments end at year 15.

Gowlane North

The evidence from the surrounding productive forest in this 27.5ha site near Bweeng, would indicate that this is a quality forestry site. Tomas Hanrahan, of Forestlink Ltd, asked independent forestry consultant Ted Horgan to assess the site, whose report states: “It has long been recognised that where the opportunity arises, the best indication of the forestry potential of a given site is achieved by observing the performance of a previous tree crop, or that of trees growing in close proximity, and on comparable conditions to the site in question.”

He carried out an assessment of the surrounding forest, including a 17-year-old Sitka spruce crop which is YC 18, while the adjacent 2015 reforested area shows remarkable vigour.

Although enclosed on three sides by high-performing Sitka spruce and larch, the site was turned down by the Forest Service as unsuitable. Reasons included too shallow topsoil cover in some areas and, as a result, it was deemed incapable of producing the minimum YC of 14.

He has appealed the decision but also commissioned an independent assessment of the vegetation. This shows that 1.5ha scores 4 (too low for planting grant); 4ha at 4 to 5 or GPC 1 ; and 22ha rated greater than 6, which qualifies for GPC 3. If this is accepted, 20% of the area will receive no grant or the lowest GPC 1 grant, but the owner is willing to go ahead if 80% is rated at GPC 3.

The site will now be reevaluated based on the vegetation survey.

Gortnahoughtee

Gortnahoughtee is a 21ha site about 3km southwest of Inchigeelagh on the lower slopes of the Sheehy Mountains.

It had been originally turned down for grant aid but later reconsidered when the vegetation rating was introduced. It featured as part of a field day for foresters – private, Forest Service and Teagasc – when the new vegetation assessment scheme was rolled out.

“This site was one of the first to benefit from the vegetation rating, and was an excellent example of foresters – State and private – meeting to discuss ways to objectively assess a site,” said Ger Moroney. Again, the nearby forest provides evidence that this site would grow at least YC 20 Sitka while also supporting an alder crop.

As a result of the assessment, the site was rated at over 6 and approved under the GPC3 scheme. “We mounded the area and provided an initial application of ground mineral phosphate,” said Alan Farrelly, Green Belt. He said that in the short period since the area was mounded and fertilised the vegetation is even more lush. The performance of the spruce and alder so far is excellent and the Green Belt foresters are confident that the area will require no further fertilisation over the crop rotation.

When asked about the vegetation analysis, Tomas Hanrahan, Ger Moroney and Alan Farrelly agreed that it could provide positive results if adhered to consistently. They believe that it may prove too costly on small sites but if it brings productive unenclosed sites into the planting programme it will be worthwhile.

Summary

While soil and vegetation conditions can change over relatively short distances in Ireland, the performance of nearby forests should be a major influencing factor in determining site suitability for afforestation. However, vegetation is an excellent indicator of site productivity especially in the absence of nearby forest performance.

There is now no rationale for refusing afforestation grant aid in productive unenclosed sites. The Irish Forestry and Forest Products Association (IFFPA) supports the vegetation scoring system but believes it should be modified to allow more productive land to be planted, while “the GPC1 grant should be increased to that of GPC 2 and premium rates should be increased and backdated to 2015 for those who have planted GPC1,” said Mark McAuley, IFFPA .

The three sites I inspected can produce YCs up to 22. Compared to the average yields of countries such as Finland and Sweden (4), France (6) and Spain (12), this is a major achievement. There are thousands more similar sites around the country which if planted would provide a welcome boost to an underperforming afforestation programme.