Sir, – John FitzGerald’s article “Clumsy EU law hampering our ability to plant forests” (Business, Opinion, October 14th) points to EU law to explain the virtual collapse of the afforestation programme in Ireland.
However, the truth is that EU regulation is not the problem, as other EU jurisdictions comply with existing directives and enjoy a healthy and vibrant afforestation programme.
The problems in Ireland are all in-house, a result of the Department of Agriculture’s Forest Service driving hype-regulation, unparalleled incompetence, and no accountability. – Yours, etc,
GILL McCARTHY,
Shooting the breeze with trailblazer chemists
Kamala Harris is a descendant of an Irish slave owner in Jamaica
Tactical analysis: Clare got their numbers right, but it’s hard to measure sheer magic
Artist and shepherd Orla Barry: ‘Breeding animals is like making an artwork. You’re putting certain animals together’
Shillelagh,
Co Wicklow.
Sir, – The article by John FitzGerald and responses (Letters, October 14th and 15th) have focused attention once more on the needless forestry licensing crisis caused by the interpretation, by our administrators and their advisers, of regulations derived from EU environmental directives.
Behind this interpretation is a view held uniquely in this country that forestry is a problem rather than a solution in mitigating environmental risks.
Nothing could be further from reality when net benefits – economic, environmental and social – are considered. Well-managed forests of any composition store carbon, provide green cost-effective goods, secure diversity throughout miles of green corridors, margins and open spaces, and currently provide health and relaxation to millions of visitors.
A read through the tortuous legal report on forestry licensing legislation commissioned by Minister of State for Land Use and Biodiversity Pippa Hackett, through the Project Woodlands initiative, seems to suggest that the problem originated through the interpretation of forestry as a “project” rather than another land use activity related to agriculture. This definition strangely attracts far more rigorous regulation than does the full spectrum of other agricultural activities, and there seems to be no good reason why it should apply to all key forest practices.
Experience of working with the EU shows that its policy is best achieved without micro-management (subsidiarity). Where a well-presented and negotiated case is made, derogation (an exception) can be achieved, if it can be shown that the overall policy is being followed.
Crucially, the EU sees forestry as a key mechanism in carbon sequestration and an increased afforestation programme is seen by most experts as essential in achieving net-zero emissions by 2050 and avoiding a carbon cliff where felling exceeds planting.
Our negotiators need to step forward now to ensure these goals are met. – Yours, etc,
Dr GERHARDT GALLAGHER,
Ranelagh,
Dublin 6.