Great idea.

PS I can’t get an exact figure of what the fines will be within a few years but it’s of the order of €1,000,000,000 PER YEAR. The only other alternative is to buy very expensive carbon credits but there’s a limit of 10% of excess on that and we are 30% over our limits. We could hire 10,000 workers planting trees and paying for equipment etc with a billion. That billion would mainly stay in the Irish economy whereas the billion in fines goes to the EU central coffers.

Why can’t politicians think more than forward to the next election?

Great concept. This seems to be the type of thinking that is sadly missing from the countires leaders.
I would however prefer to plant native trees only. Ash and the like. Greater long term value but better for the environment and Tourism in the medium term.

If you do anything there are downsides. The trick is a mixture of different trees. Conifers could be planted where they do least harm. An empty wilderness which seems to make up much of our mountainsides which is devoid of trees is hardly good for wildlife?

True, but that ‘empty wilderness’ would most likely have been an oakwood 300 years ago, and acidic run-off from forestry remains a serious threat to fisheries, not to mention the eutrophication caused by fertiliser run-off in the early years of a commercial plantation.

Jaysus. Need I remind you that the English chopped down our hardwood forests to build their bloody ships.

Its easy to hold onto your own resources whilst using up everybody else’s.

That’s because the Brits took a good chunk of it for their shipbuilding

Are you comparing Tallaght and Tallinn :p there.

A lot of roads there are named pineview ave/road/lawn etc from when these areas were built in the late 70s. Terrible that we’ve effectively removed a significant portion of that forest in less than 35yrs!

True, oak was highly prized for shipbuilding and many areas of native oakwoods were cut down for this purpose.

these people aren’t stupid, they know the issues, they don’t care.

I wonder Andrew what connection your comment (er…er..rant) has with this story?

think his point is the area of space taken up by urban sprawl could have been viable forestry locations.

The article was about forests not the concrete jungle.

When you take a detailed look at the conditions attached to re afforestation grants one will understand why we are at a level of 10%.

Thank God that’s finished….

No.

It could definitely contribute.

Yes actually

No. The reason for the flooding was……. let me think…… ooh ya it was that stuff falling out of the sky.

Got it…..RAIN.

Yes, thats right – rain- the wet stuff that falls from the sky, a large percentage of which is soaked up by areas of forestry, but in the absence of same forestry runs direct and unimpeded into our water courses where it accumulates in large volumes and causes soil erosion and widespread flooding in our towns and cities (many of which have been built on flood plains but that is a different story).

Please educate yourselves hamstrings and popcorn.

Ryan, whether the trees are oresent or not, the surface (grass/topsoil) and underlying strata is still permeable…unless the area has been overlain with an impermeable surface (concrete/macadam) but it’s not, and if it was additional drainage measures would have been required by the planners in any event.

Please educate yourself with regard to hydraulic design.

You’re wrong, creamy.

A simple google if “deforestation and flooding” might help.

And then you can get back to your hydraulic designs.

Hanstrings, I’m afraid you’re wrong. Who are you anyway? All you seem to do here is troll.

@Mattoid, The percentage of the country covered by forestry in 1990 was 6.4% its now 10% or there abouts. It wed actually less than 1% in the early 1990’s.

You just cannot correlate the recent ‘once in a lifetime floods’ we have experienced with not having enough trees.

Go and tell the people of Clonakilty, Gort, Clonmel, and Cork city centre and the other flood hot spots around the country that you are going to solve their flood problems by planting trees.

“Educate yourself”. I suggest you gets your facts straight before making comments off the top of your head.

Granting planning in the flood planes was unforgiveable and unfortunately irreversible.

http://www.indexmundi.com/ireland/land-area-covered-by-forest,-percentage.html

@Mattoid, The percentage of the country covered by forestry in 1990 was 6.4% its now 10% or there abouts. It wed actually less than 1% in the early 1990’s.

You just cannot correlate the recent ‘once in a lifetime floods’ we have experienced with not having enough trees.

Go and tell the people of Clonakilty, Gort, Clonmel, and Cork city centre and the other flood hot spots around the country that you are going to solve their flood problems by planting trees.

“Educate yourself”. I suggest you gets your facts straight before making comments off the top of your head.

Granting planning in the flood planes was unforgiveable and unfortunately
irreversible.

http://www.indexmundi.com/ireland/land-area-covered-by-forest,-percentage.html

Okay enough of this craic. I must go and light my lovely new wood burning stove.

Popcorn – I’m sorry to have to break the news to you, but its definitely you that’s wrong!
Agreed, our bouts of flooding in recent years have many causes, not least of which is wetter summers, building on areas that should never have been built on and associated flood defences just passing the problem on to the next town downstream.

The point is that woodland delays and reduces the movement of surface water by soaking up large volumes and providing a physical barrier to slow the flow. Like it or not, this is a recognised and quantifiable fact worldwide.

As Nivag said, you could do worse than google “deforestation and flooding” as a starting point…

@Mattoid. So the floods we have had in the last 20 years is all because of deforestation?

However, the facts state that Ireland has increased it area of forestry by nearly 40% in the same period.

Ooh you may be right (in your own mind) but you have demonstrated a total lack of ability to comprehend the obvious.

@Popcorn
“So the floods we have had in the last 20 years is all because of deforestation?”
Nobody is saying that – which posts have you been reading? The causes of flooding are complex and varied, and afforestation, or lack of, is but one of many factors.

It is simplistic in the extreme just to say that the percentage of forested land has increased in recent years therefore it can’t be connected to flooding, without looking at other compexities such as the geographical breakdown of both flooding and forestry. For example it could well be the case that heavily forested areas have escaped the worst of the flooding whilst the areas worst affected by flooding are the areas which have least forestry in their catchment areas.

If you care to do your research you will find that there is overwhelming empirical worldwide evidence that flooding is exacerbated wherever forests have been cleared.

PS – check your own figures for consistency – you have said that forestry cover in 1990 was 6.4% but was less than 1% in the early 1990′s ;-)

Well spotted. It was less than 1% in the early 1900’s. We’ve still increased our level of deforestation by nearly 40% in the last 20 years.

Therefore you cannot possible say that Irelands flooding in that period has been caused by deforestation.

You seem to be getting confused between deforestation and afforestation – I’ll put that down to a typo ;-)

My last point about geographical breakdown between forestry and flooding seems to have gone completely over your head.

I can’t even begin to post links to all the studies that have shown a clear link between deforestation and increased flooding, there are so many of them. All you need to do is look for yourself. Still, I’m sure you know best.

Yes it has.

The sad thing is that this is a victory of sorts. We are up to 10% now.

One of the principal causes of folding in urban areas (getting back to Andrew’s point at the top of the page) is urban sprawl. Water from roofs, roads, carparks etc. etc. is channelled and concentrated into surface water drainage systems to be almost immediately discharged into open watercourses (rivers) that can’t handle the volume. Like the lack of afforestation the principal cause of urban flooding is bad planning.

As I said above Cormac, much of it is the wrong type of forest cover and is ecologically very damaging.

I agree Joe Walsh but it takes up to 50 years for ash to mature and much longer for oak and beach .it takes forward selfless vision that is sadly lacking in this country for this to happen