Only 27% of planting programmes approved by the Forestry Appeals Committee (FAC)

In the first five weeks of this year, the Forestry Appeals Committee (FAC) heard 21 appeals against afforestation, forest roading and felling licences already approved by the Forest Service inspectorate on behalf of the Ministerof Agriculture, Food and the Marine. Of the total 137ha of afforestation licences issued, the FAC turned down 64ha or 47% of the proposed programme, while 26% (36ha) were classed as ‘vary’, requiring changes as outlined by the committee before approval (Table 1). The FAC approved 27% or 37ha of afforestation.

Applicants with forest road and felling licences fared better. There were five roading applications before the committee and all but one were approved, with the remaining road classed as ‘vary’. The committee heard only one felling licence application, which was approved.

The FAC came into being following the commencement of the Forestry Act 2014 on 24 May 2017. The Agriculture Appeals Act, 2001, was amended “to provide for the functions of the FAC, the decisions that may be appealed and the procedures to be followed in respect of appeals”.

The Act states that where a person is dissatisfied with a forestry proposal approved by the inspectorate, they “may submit an appeal against a decision on a licence, an approval and/or an entry into a register” concerning the following:

An appeal against the above operations is heard and determined by the FAC. “The decision of the FAC shall be to confirm, cancel or vary the decision of the Minister or officer of the Minister as it thinks fit,” maintains the Procedures for Appeals. “All appeals must be received by the FAC within 28 calendar days from the date of the decision letter of the Minister or an officer of the Minister.”

There is no charge in appealing a decision and an individual or group may appeal any number of planting, felling and roading projects where licences are issued on behalf of the Minister.

Of the total 137ha of afforestation licences issued, the FAC turned down 64ha or 47% of the proposed programme

All the licences appealed had been approved by the Forest Service inspectorate and had also been approved by agencies such as the National Parks and Wildlife Service, fisheries bodies and local authorities.

All cases before the FAC were appealed for a variety of reasons, including landscape issues, closeness to Natura 2000 sites, proximity to rivers and streams, fire hazards, closeness to dwellings and habitat impact.

Appellants also objected to forestry applicants because they were not local, while future forestry activity, including harvesting and increased traffic during timber removals, were also cited. The FAC findings (www.agriappeals.gov.ie/forestryappealscommittee/facdecisions/2020/) are issued weekly.

The problems facing Ireland’s afforestation and wood mobilisation programmes are best illustrated in the last available findings from the FAC’s decisions (week ending 17 February). These comprised one forest road and four afforestation judgements. Not one of the licences approved by the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine received outright approval by the FAC.

Some of these applications had been submitted for approval by registered foresters on behalf of landowners over two years ago. All were eventually approved on behalf of the Minister by Forest Service inspectors from February last year to January this year and issued with licences to plant or construct roads. All were appealed by individuals and groups who objected to the schemes for a variety of social, personal and environmental reasons.

Not one of the licences approved by the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine received outright approval by the FAC

In their findings, the committee agreed with the appellants in three afforestation sites and cancelled licences to plant 40ha. The remaining planting programme for 17ha and a 310m forest road application were classed as “vary”, requiring the landowner to readjust an application with required changes as recommended by the FAC. This should then be approved, if the applicant has the patience and perseverance to continue.

The latest findings by the FAC outline the impossibility in achieving a viable afforestation programme. Based on average planting sizes of 7ha to 9ha, the Government’s annual afforestation target of 8,000ha, will require licences for 1,000 planting sites. Now, all these licences can be appealed, despite rigorous and costly assessment by the Forest Service and other agencies.

Based on average planting sizes of 7ha to 9ha, the Government’s annual afforestation target of 8,000ha, will require licences for 1,000 planting sites

In this scenario, approval of 20 afforestation applications will be required weekly to achieve the Government’s target. With all licences now being contested, these may end up before the FAC, which has the resources to issue an average of four findings weekly, with no more than two receiving the green light to plant.

Some of the findings issued by the FAC demonstrate the urgent need to implement the recommendations of the recent Mackinnon review, including the introduction of “fees for submitting applications, making submissions and lodging appeals”. In the meantime, further resources need to be provided to the FAC, including the appointment of a vice-chair to increase processing of appeals.

It is also vital to establish an Irish Forestry Standard, as recommended by Mackinnon, to provide guidance and consistency to the FAC, landowners, the inspectorate, registered foresters and appellants. It is important that current guidelines are interpreted clearly. For example, the COFORD and EPA research findings on the impact of forestry on water quality must feature in the FAC findings. These need to be reassessed and updated to bring fresh objectivity into the forestry debate.

Some of the findings issued by the FAC demonstrate the urgent need to implement the recommendations of the recent Mackinnon review

For example, the 2008 EPA-COFORD study, Forestry Operations and Eutrophication – PEnrich states that commercial forest operations can be conducted without detrimental effects on water quality “if Forest Service guidelines are strictly adhered to”. Even in densely commercial coniferous forested areas on unenclosed deep peats, such as Ballinagee, Co Wicklow. “The most striking result of the study was the absence of any significant detrimental influence of forestry or forest operations on [Phosphate] concentrations.”

It is also time that licences issued for afforestation cover future management of the forest, providing the owner implements a forest management plan and adheres to the Forest Service guidelines. Currently, landowners who are subject to the appeals procedure at planting will face repeated appeals throughout the forest cycle, as they prepare crops for roading and felling licence approval, which the FAC has made clear in its findings.

With so many obstacles being placed before farmers who wish to plant or who have planted, it is no surprise that interest in establishing the forests and woodlands of the future is at an all time low.