IRISH FORESTRY

Forestry and Recreation

J. Peter Clinch and Frank J. Convery, Environmental Studies, University College,Dublin

Introduction cent, with considerable varIatIon In this paper, we review the existing within this total. What has happened levels and trends of forest recreation in since 1976? While there are figures for Ireland to the extent that the data charged day visits to Coillte's forest allow. We then examine its value, and parks (Table 2) these data are not com­ conclude with a review of the policy parable with those in Table I since implications. An appendix is included they do not capture the number of vis­ which outlines general issues in forest itors who enter on days when no recreation valuation. charge is levied. However, aggregate data are provided in Table 3 (Coillte's Existing Levels and Trends figures do not include patrons of the In the NESC Report No. 46 (Convery, Killykeen holiday complex). 1979), Irish Forestry Policy, the data These data seem to indicate two for visits to forest Parks are given as things: contained in Table 1. These data show an overall com­ • The very high level of visi tation to pound annual rate of growth of 12 per the State-owned forests; over l.S

Park Year Annual Avg. Table 1. 1972 1973 1976 Growth Rate (%) Number of visits to Ards 27,845 51,708 23 Forest Parks, Avondale 18,000 36,000 26 1972 to 1976. Dcen aR' 38,460 52,475 60,742 12 Gougan Barra 71,000 56,000 58,000 -5 Lough Key 125,000 147,000 264,000 21 JFK 115,300 90,000 80,000 -9 Total 349,760 392,156 550,450 12 Note: Growth rate computed from the widest spread of data available, except for the total, where the rate is computed from 1973 to 1976. Source: Convery, 1979 p. 93.

S3 IRISH FORESTRY

Table 2. Forest Park County Visits' Day Visits to Coillte Forest Parks Ards Donegal 15,000 for which a Portumna Galway 4,000 Charge] is Levied' Rossmore Monaghan 1,000 Dun anRi Cavan 20,000 Lough Key Roscommon 60,000 Currahchase Limerick 6,000 Farran Cork 15,000 Gougan Barra Cork 13,000 Killykeen Cavan 4,000 Donadee Kildare 4,0004 TOTAL 142,000 Notes: 1 A Charge is levied when it is considered economical to do so ego weekends, high season etc. '1993 Figures. 'to nearest thousand. 'Excluding caravan park. Source: Personal Communication, Coillte (M. Brennan).

Table 3. The negligible growth - and per­ Category Numbers Forest usage, haps the drop - in visits to Forest Republic ofIreland. (OOOs) Parks since 1976. All Forest use 1475 This lack of growth stands in con­ trast to the pattern of rapid growth Forest and Other Parks' 587 recorded in the case of the 37 National Specialist Groups: Monuments under the control of the Orienteers' 30 Office of Public Works, where visitor numbers have risen from 835,962 in Walkers4 230 1989 to 1,481,529 in 1993, an average annual growth rate of 15 per cent; this Notes and Sources: exaggerates the growth rate slightly, 11993 Figures Including visits to Forest Parks, because the 1993 number includes and all other forest visits (walking, orienteering etc.) in Coillte's forests. Source: Personal Com­ some new sites - notably C ide Fields munication Coillte (M. Brennan). and Hill of Tara - which have come on 'Includes National Parks (under jurisdiction of stream since 1989 (Scully, 1994). How­ OPW) as well as Forest Parks. Source: Tourism ever, it is consistent with the steady International, 1994. state situation which prevails vis-a-vis 'Source: Personal Communication lOA (F. visitor numbers to forests in Northern Cunnane). Ireland (Table 4). "Tourist' walkers. Source: Bord Failte, 1992. Although growth is modest, the number of paying visits amounts to million visits from a resident popu­ about one third of the NI population. lation of less than 3.5 million IS The NI Forest Service is planning on impressive. putting in place mechanisms which

54 IRISH FORESTRY

would facilitate the measurement of Table 4. Forest Park 1989 1992 Number of visits to other forests. There is a little (OOOs) (OOOs) more growth in the numbers caravan­ Paying Visitors to 151 139 ning and camping, and those staying at Tollymore NI Forests (OOOs) youth sites (Table 5). Castlewellan 62 60 It seems likely that in both jurisdic­ Gortin Glen 22 28 tions, Forest Park recreation has Gosford 41 54 matured in the sense that the local Glenariff 72 66 market is "saturated" and there is little Slieve Gullion 7 6 participation in the rapidly growing Lough Navar 18 20 tourist industry, whereas, presumably, Ballypatrick 17 17 the National Monuments and historic sites are benefiting from this growth. Portglenone 7 14 There is also a question as to the extent Parkanaur 8 9 to which the forests as at present con­ Car Permit Holders 43 45 stituted have comparative advantage Total 481 484 in the world tourist market as magnets. For North Americans who have Source: Northern Ireland Forest Service, 1994. savoured the profusion of colour of the Appalachians in the spring, or the ing, enjoying the scenery, camping, majesty of the redwoods of California pony trekking, horse riding, mountain (or even of Sitka spruce in the Olympic biking, motorcycling and orienteering. peninsula ... ) the Irish diet of Sitka Waymarked trail walking is a relatively spruce and lodgepole pine may not be new pursuit in Ireland with the first irresistible. In the Republic, statistics trail being opened in 1982. In Ireland may well also reflect the fact that all waymark trails with a couple of Coillte is not recovering even the vari­ exceptions have some portion in wood­ able costs of its recreation provision. land (Fig. 1). The Mountaineering Given the company's very explicitly Council has over 3500 members but commercial brief, there seems to be lit­ sales of walking guides are well in tle incentive to promote or otherwise excess of this figure (personal commu­ develop the recreational facets of the nication, J. Lynam, Chairman, Long forests under its control, an issue we Distance Walking Groups Committee). address later on. There are an increasing number of However, there are domains where accommodation providers who are our forests may have a niche in the 'packaging" forest walks as a core part international tourism market, and this of their attraction (Convery et aI, 1992). is where forests are used as "backdrop" The Long Distance Walking for other activities: Groups Committee have made a sub­ Forests in Ireland are used for walk- mission to the Forest Service for the

Activity 1989 1992 Table 5. Caravanning and Camping Usage (nights) 19,571 21,526 Overnight Stays at Youth Sites (nights) 12,226 13,442 NI State Forests Source: Northern Ireland Forest Service 1994.

55 IRISH FORESTRY

Strategic Plan for the Development of third most important special interest the Forestry Sector to the Year 2015 product for ROI with 230,000 overseas which lists that one of its aims is "to participants in 1991 of which 40,000 assess the potential of the various ele­ had their choice of holiday destination ments of the forestry sector to make a influenced by the provision of this greater contribution to national eco­ facility. Bord Failte's target is to raise nomic and social well-being" and these numbers to 350,000 and 70,000 invites interested parties and the pub­ respectively by 1997. Bord Failte pro­ lic to prepare submissions. poses to establish Ireland as an Orienteering was developed by the internationally recognised centre for Swedish Army in 1903 and was estab­ adventure sports such as Orienteering. lished in Ireland in 1969. As a sport it In 1991 7,000 overseas visitors partici­ is reliant on forests for its survival. pated in adventure sports of which Results are distorted when competi­ 3,000 were influenced in their choice tions takes place on open land since it allows competitors to see other run­ of holiday destination by the facilities ners. The sport encourages skill in provided and the intention is to map reading and is the second most increase these numbers by 1,500 and important sport in army circles, sec­ 1,000 respectively by 1997. These facil­ ond only to shooting and as such is of ities are of great importance in importance for army and Garda train­ providing niche markets for tourism ing. Competitors range in age from 8 to in Ireland. From these figures it is 65 years and as such is very much a clear that forests can help to attract family sport at a cost of about £2 per tourists. This is most important when competitor. In 1993, 153 orienteering you consider that foreign and domestic competitions were organised under the tourist expenditure amounted to auspices of the Irish Orienteering £1,717.8m in 1991, the exchequer Association with the number of run­ raised £326m from foreign tourism ners varying from between 150 and and £149m from domestic tourism by 600. Assuming an average of only 200, way of taxes and tourism revenue this means that more than 30,000 runs accounted for 7.3 % of all exports of were made last year. Club membership goods and services (Bord Failte, 1993). is about 2,100 with an estimated 1,000 It is worth noting that over one third of others also involved. In 1993, an esti­ all visits to Irish tourist attractions are mate was made by Coillte of the impact made by Irish residents (Tourism of Orienteering on a forest. The OPW Development International, 1994). tested the Leinster Championships at What income and employment Cronybyrne, near Rathdrum and informed the Association that they impacts might reasonably be expected? found no detrimental signs and no Assuming an average expenditure per rubbish (personal communication, F. visitor of £325 (Department of An Cunnane, National Fixtures Sec., Irish Taoiseach, 1990) and a total expenditure Orienteering Association). (direct and indirect) per job generated of £25,000 (Deane and Henry, 1993), then Tourism 40,000 visitors would have the following In Developing Sustainable Tourism employment impact: (1992) Walking is deemed to be the 40,000 X 325 -;- 25,000 = 520 jobs

56 IRISH FORESTRY

LoNe-DISTANCE WAI..KIN<; RmJfF.S IN IRELAND

~17 ~-~ ~

Long Distance Walking Routes South Leinster Way 11. Kerry Way Munster Way 12. Dingle Way 3. Barrow Way 13. Burren Way 4. Grand Canal Way 14. Aran Way S. Royal Canal Way IS. Western Way (Mayo) 6. Slieve Bloom Way 16. Leitrim Way 7. WicklowWay 17. Cavan Way 8. Beara Way 18. Tain Way 9. Lough Derg way 19. Offaly Way 10. Ballyhoura Way 20. Slieve Felim Way

57 ------

IRISH FORESTRY

Valuing forest recreation benefits from approximately £0.80 to £2.18, It is typically the case that it is difficult with an average WTP of approxi­ practically and politically for the mately £1.50. These figures are lower owner - and especially the public for NI with lower and upper bounds of owner - to "capture" in the market approximately £0.60 and £1.55 with an place the benefits which forest recre­ average WTP of approximately £1.10. ation provides. Three methods have Some of the most frequently visited been developed to place a value on for­ sites received a lower average WTP. est recreation. These are: Contingent Since many of these sites are urban Valuation (involving surveys ofbenefi­ forests WTP is reduced by frequent ciaries), Travel Cost (involving using return visits. Aesthetic assessments of travel costs to derive willingness to the sites were undertaken and the pay) and Hedonic Pricing (involving authors report a positive correlation use of effects of forests on property val­ between site quality and WTP. Total ues). The background and rationale of recreational benefit for the sites stud­ these approaches are described in some ied was £6.25 million in NI and detail in Annex A, as are the results of £7million in ROI. They estimate total a number of studies in the UK, recreational benefit by adding Netherlands and Sweden. declared travel and other visit related The results of a well known valua­ expenditures to average WTP site tion study in the UK are shown in entry charges which are then raised by Table 6. estimated visitor numbers. The study Hutchinson and Chilton (1994) finds no relationship between site size examine forest recreation in Ireland and total recreational benefits. and Scotland using Contingent Valua­ The authors suggest that the gener­ tion and multi-site Travel Cost (see ally high value of urban forestry appendix A for an explanation of these combined with the small geographical terms). Thirteen sites were chosen in size of their market area provides a ROI and fourteen in NI comprising 0.7 "strong argument" for more resources to % and 13 % of the forested area in each be devoted to this form ofland use. The jurisdiction respectively. Willingness study estimates that over 50 % of recre­ to Pay (WTP) a site entry charge for a ational visits took place on sites covering single day visit to a ROI forest varied 0.7 % in ROI and 0.4 % in NI. This

Lowest Highest Mean Table 6. Value Value Value Estimates of British Forest Forest Forest forestry recreation (1988 £) (1988 £) (1988 £) values using the Travel Cost Individual recreation value (per visit) 1.34 3.31 2.00 Method (Benson and Willis, 1990). Recreation value per ha 1.00 428.00 47.00 Source: Bateman, 1992.

58 IRISH FORESTRY

Table 7. Year State Forests Private Forests Total Forest area, Ireland, ODDs ha ODDs ha ODDs ha 1922, 1938 and 1922 10 106 116 1993. 1938 19 101 120 1993 439 163 602

Source: Convery and Clinch; Forest Service, personal communication; NI Forest Service, 1994.

would suggest that the majority of subsi­ The supply of forest recreation dies for the provision of forest recreation in Ireland should go to a small geographical area The extent of the forest estate in Ireland rather than to all forest owners. is shown in Table 7. While it is clear If, for purposes of illustration, we that the majority of the forested area is apply the average willingness to pay owned by Coillte or the NI Forest Ser­ per visit of £1.50 to the estimate of visit vice, annual planting by private numbers to Coillte's forests of 1.475 investors has increased dramatically million, we find a total annual WTP of over the last ten years as a result of just over £2.2 million. (Note that this falling returns from farming and figure does not give the total cost to the increasing grants for forestry (Table 8). consumer of forest recreation since it It must be noted that some of this does not include other costs the con­ forestry would not be suitable for sumer is willing to pay to experience recreational use and not all is available forest recreation such as travel cost and for such a purpose. opportunity cost and thus is not Forests are increasing in impor­ directly comparable with Hutchinson tance for outdoor recreation as public and Chilton's estimate of total recre­ access to farming land becomes ational benefit). increasingly limited. In the UK, the The Coolatin oak woods provide an government's "Forestry Review interesting example of willingness to Group" has been examining the costs pay on the part of the Irish public to and benefits of selling off portions of conserve a woodland which they the Forestry Commission's estate. The regard as of some uniqueness. Approx­ estate consists of over 1m ha and has a imately IR£40,000 was collected from potential value of £1.7 billion. The private individuals to support the pub­ Review Group has received submis­ lic purchase of the woods; presumably sions from some 300 organisations and this was done in the main with altruis­ 3,000 individuals and faces a strong tic intent, without any hope or anti-privatisation lobby led by the expectation of pecuniary gain. The Ramblers Association who are con­ Coolatin case comprises an example of cerned about the loss of public access. what economists call 'option value' a While woodland has been sold to pri­ willingness to pay to keep options vate companies with an agreement to open. It is a separate question as to allow public access, this agreement what such options are; what is of inter­ cannot be continued to a second pur­ est for our purposes is that there was a chaser (Economist, February 5th-ll th "willingness to pay". 1994).

59 ------

IRISH FORESTRY

Table 8. Total planting Year State Private Total (afforestation and 1982 8,033 687 8,720 reforestation), Ireland, 1983 7,988 345 8,333 1982-93, in hectares. 1984 7,988 539 8,527 1985 7,573 844 8,417 1986 8,155 2,623 10,778 1987 8,752 3,477 12,229 1988 11,153 5,584 16,737 1989 11,201 8,738 19,939 1990 11,288 10,315 21,603 1991 12,052 11,930 23,982 1992 12,420 9,654 22,065 1993 12,003 10,082 22,085

Sources: Convery and Clinch; State planting 1989·92 from Coillte Annual Reports; State planting 1993 from Coillte, personal communication (G. O'Reilly); NI planting 1992·93, NI Forest Service, 1994.

The first official way marked trail, Incentives to provide forest the Wicklow Way, opened in 1982 and recreation in Ireland there are now 20 ways (Fig. 2) covering 1700 km of walking (Cospoir, 1994). Coillte Coillte estimates that the cost of pro­ The routes are established in co-opera­ viding forest recreation in 1993 was tion with Bord Failte, Coillte, private £527,496 or £0.36 per visitor (Table 9). landowners and local authorities. Bord It is important to note that the figure Failte (1992) estimate that an extra 20 for total cost is comprised of variable nature trails will be required by 1997 cost and depreciation i.e., it constitutes in order to accommodate the increased the cost of the upkeep of the forests number of walkers. (the maintenance cost) but does not

Category Amount (OOOs 1993 IR£) Per Visit (1993 IR£)' Table 9. Cost' 528 0.36 Coillte Costs and Revenue 267 0.18 Revenues from Forest Net Revenue' (261) (0.18) Recreation! Notes: )1993 Figures. 'Based on number of Visits of 1.475 million. 'Not including costs of public liability claims. 'Brackets indicate a deficit. Source: Personal Communication, Coillte (M. Brennan).

60 IRISH FORESTRY

Table 10. Non-Commercial Total Category Commercial NI Forest Service Recreation' Recreation3 Costs and (OOOs Sterling) (OOOs Sterling) (OOOs Sterling) Revenues from Cost 108 499 607 Forest Recreation l Admin. Cost 179 343 522 Revenue 190 229 419 Net Revenue' (97) (613) (710) Notes: 11993 Figures. 2Cost of operating camping and caravan sites at forest parks plus services involving the rearing, selling and shooting of game. 3COSI of providing amenities at forest parks for day visitors. 4Brackets indicate a deficit. Source: Personal Communication, NI Forest Service (P. Hunter Blair) include the fixed cost of establishing Annual revenue generated by the plantation (personal communica­ Coillte from forest recreation in 1993 is tion, Martin Brennan). It also does not estimated to be £267,000 or £0.18 per include any modification of timber person. Thus net revenue to Coillte is management required to accommodate minus £260,496 (Table 9), to which the recreation use in question. The must be added the cost of meeting pub­ Northern Ireland Forest Service esti­ lic liability costs. This amounts to mate the costs of providing recreation Coillte subsidising each visitor by 50 % to be £522,000 sterling (Table 10). (£0.18). NI Forest Service revenue The Public Liability Conundrum: from forest recreation is estimated to There is a disincentive to allow access be £419,000 Sterling giving a net rev­ to existing forests for recreational pur­ enue of minus £710,000 Sterling poses because of fears of damage been (Table 10). caused. However, the largest disincen­ The entrance fees charged at tive would seem to be public liability Coillte's forest parks are shown in insurance. Forest owners are liable for Table 11. The NI Forest Service levies possible large payouts even to tres­ similar charges at forest parks where it passers who injure themselves while in is economical to do so. the woodland. Coillte (and its prede­ Coillte's forest parks are used by a cessor) has paid out over £lOO,OOO in wide variety of groups who apply on an damages to visitors to its forests since individual basis for permits to carry 1986 including a single payout of out certain activities such as orienteer­ £80,000 for an ankle injury. It faces a ing and pony trekking. The possible further £130,000 payout in Orienteering Association has its own unsettled cases (personal communica­ insurance policy such that Coillte are tion, Coillte, M. Brennan). The Law not liable for personal injury during an reform Commission is expected to pro­ event. Some private forests are pro­ duce a report in the near future which vided free of charge for orienteering is likely to become the basis for a (personal communication, F. Cun­ change in the public liability law. nane, Fixtures Sec., Irish Orienteering

61 IRISH FORESTRY

Table 11. challenge. Under Section 38, the Min­ Category Entrance Fee (£) Entrance fees charged ister may issue directions in writing to at Coillte forest parks. Adults 1 Car/Family 3 the company requiring the company Season Ticket 15 (access to all to, inter alia: provide or maintain spec­ forest parks) ified services or facilities, to maintain Coach 16 or use specified land or premises in the Minibus 8 company's possession for a particular purpose. Source: Personal communication, Coillte (M. Brennan) If the company satisfies the Minis­ ter that... it has sustained a loss in complying with a direction under the relevant subsection, it shall be entitled Association). to recover the loss from the Minister. A TDI survey calculated the aver­ There is an implicit, if rather weak, age admission charge to parks (forests recognition here that cross subsidising and otherwise) in ROI to be £1.66 with may be inhibiting the achievement of 63 % of those surveyed rating value for commercial objectives. However, it money to be "very good" (TDI, 1994). seems to us that it would certainly be Grants for planned recreational preferable if there were an explicit forestry are payable from the Rural understanding as to the recreation Development Operational Pro­ facilities and services to be provided, gramme. However, grants contribute and then if these were budgeted for to establishment costs but not to separately, some perhaps allocated on a Coillte's maintenance cost. tender basis. From the foregoing, we conclude that there is no incentive for Coillte to Private Investors provide forest recreation under the We failed to get any data, for either the pricing and other conditions prevail­ Republic or Northern Ireland, as to the ing. nature, extent and potential of recre­ Under Section 12 of the Forestry ation on private forest land. Act, 1988, the duties of the company Grant Support for Forest Recre­ are laid out: They emphasise the finan­ ation and Amenity Provision in ROI: cial and commercial dimension, Grant applications for planned recre­ including: ational forestry under the 1992/93 The need to ensure that revenues guidelines must include plans and are sufficient to meet all charges specifications for planting and recre­ (including depreciation); to generate a ational facilities together with reasonable proportion of capital needs; estimated costs and detailed maps. If to remunerate capital and repay bor­ there is a limitation on public access rowings; to conduct business in a cost the reason must be given. The proposal effective and efficient manner. must include at least one planned or The only oblique reference to recre­ existing specific amenity attraction ation is the duty: to have due regard to such as fishing lake, picnic sites, sub­ the environmental and amenity conse­ stantial river frontage, game quences of its operations. development, walks or nature trails or Defining "due regard" given the archaeological site; or be located in an other pressures on the company is a urban area. A minimum of 1700 and

62 IRISH FORESTRY

1100 plants per hectare is required for a specified minimum number of days conifers and broadleaves respectively. per annum. Charging for admission All plantations must include a mini­ would be permitted as there would be mum of 10 % broadleaves and a mixed no maintenance grant (personal com­ coniferlbroadleaf plantation must con­ munication, Forest Service, A. tain a minimum of 40 % broadleaves. Murray). As with applications under other Grant aid in the UK: One of the forestry grant schemes they must com­ aims of the UK Woodland Grant ply with the various guidelines related Scheme (Forestry Commission, 1993) to fisheries, archaeology and land­ is to "encourage people to create new scape. Unplanted space is limited to woodlands and forests to offer oppor­ one third of the total area. tunities for recreation and sport". In The grant level is set at 85 % for addition to establishment grants and farmers and co-operatives and 70 % for management grants there is a Commu­ others subject to the following max- nity Woodland Supplement of £950 ima: per ha which is paid to encourage peo­ £2000 per ha for broadleaves. ple to create new woodlands near £1100 per ha for conifers. towns and cities which can be used for £350 per ha for construction or informal recreation. To be eligible the upgrading of access and woodland must be within 5 miles of recreational facilities includ­ the edge of a village, town or city and ing seats and signs. in an area where the current opportu­ £200 per ha to public agencies to nities for woodland recreation are encourage community limited. Charges can be made where involvement and for promo­ special facilities or services are pro­ tional and educational work. vided. Once the woodland is 11 years The progress made by this scheme old it will be eligible for a Special Man­ is shown in Table 12. agement Grant. The scheme is expected to continue It is clear the involvement in Ire­ from 1994-99 under the new Forestry land in grant aided amenity/ Operational Programme but EU recreational forestry is extremely mod­ approval (at time of writing) has not est at present. However, it grows, and if been received. one takes the view that there is a In its submission to the EU Com­ greater demand for recreation in mlSSlOn concerning the Forestry broadleaf forests, then this could tip Sub-Programme of the new Opera­ the revenue streams in favour of tional Programme for Agriculture, the Department of Agriculture, Food and broadleaves and increase their paltry Forestry is seeking to assist further rate of planting. However, the long private investment in recreational/ amenity forestry under the 1994-99 round of structural funds. It proposes Year Number Area (ha) Table 12. to encourage the conversion of derelict of Schemes Progress of Planned woodland in tandem with the develop­ 4 172 1992 Recreational Forestry ment of recreational/amenity forestry. 1993 10 253 In such cases woodland owners would Scheme be required to provide public access for Source: Forest Service, personal communication.

63 IRISH FORESTRY

time span required for the develop­ would help to maximise the economic ment of a forest (particularly welfare of a nation (Pearce, 1992). This broadleaf) capable of providing a recre­ doctrine, known as "laissez-faire", is the ational secondary use may be seen as basis for the market economy, whereby prohibitive. For this reason incentives pressures produced by the free play of to convert derelict forest (particularly market supply and demand will induce broadleaf or mixed forest) seem most adjustment in prices such that the appropriate. socially optimal (most desirable) quan­ tity of a good is produced. But the Attitudes to forest recreation untrammelled market does not achieve Boyle and Storey (1993) carried out all of society's objectives: the market a survey at six forest sites in the fails. In forestry, market failure occurs Greater Dublin area during the sum­ where the market does not produce a mer of 1993 to ascertain attitudes of socially optimal level of a particular for­ visitors to the sites and the impact of est service or product. This happens in forest recreation on the residents of the case of inputs and outputs which are Enniskerry, Co. Wicklow. Visitors not bought and sold through markets, used the sites mainly for passive recre­ where costs are not borne by the perpe­ ation, walking, admiring scenery and trator of same, and benefits are not nature and taking fresh air. The main captured by the provider thereof. These areas of concern for both local resi­ are called external costs and benefits, or dents and visitors were litter and externalities. External effects are com­ vandalism and visitors suggested sign monly found in forestry (Figure AI): posting should be improved. One It is important to note that forests quarter of visitors were concerned can simultaneously be a generator of about the security of their car while external costs and benefits in the same parked in forest carparks. While few category. Thus, some forms of recre­ visitors worried about personal safety, ation, e.g. orienteering, will be local residents were concerned about expanded, while others, e.g. grouse unsupervised campers. The majority shooting, may be diminished. of visitors were not willing to pay an Externalities result in an inefficient entry fee but were not opposed to the allocation of society's scarce resources; funding of recreational forestry from where the forest owner is producing taxation. Local residents believed that external costs and/or external benefits, the forests provided an amenity value then, by definition, he or she does not as well as improving the surrounding bear the consequences or capture the environment. The majority of those fruits thereof, and will "overproduce" the sampled believed that motorcycling former, and "under produce" the latter. should be banned within forests. Recreation as an external effect Annex A: General issues in forest Recreation can be considered as a pos­ recreation valuation itive or negative externality produced by forestry. Walking, taking nature Introduction trails, camping, picnicking, hunting, In his famous treatise the. Wealth of berry picking, horse riding, orienteer­ Nations Adam Smith argued that indi­ ing, mountain bike riding, motorbike viduals acting purely out of self-interest scrambling, bird and wildlife watch-

64 IRISH FORESTRY

ing, 'paint-balling', fishing in forest Fig AI. External Benefits External Costs lakes, army training, scouts and girl External Costs and guides expeditions etc. can all take Wildlife Habitat Destruction of Benefits ofForestry. place in forests. Thus, forests make an Natural Landscape important contribution to the well­ Biodiversity Recreation Loss being of the population and make a significant contribution to revenue Shelter Amenity Loss from tourism. However, forests can Soil Stability Habitat Loss also take away open spaces and destroy Amenity Biodiversity Loss the ecological and archaeological envi­ ronment and thus restrict recreation, Recreation Soil Degradation thereby imposing external costs. Carbon Sinks Loss of Game 'Capturing' the benefits accruing Macro-climate Hydrological: from forest recreation Regulation water traps Are the recreation benefits yielded by Berries/Game acidification forests external, i.e. are they such as Ecology Value silting cannot be 'captured' by the forest owner? For the most part, they are: Hydrological: Reduction of numerous small parcels of land make regulation storage Archaeological limiting access difficult and expensive Endowment technically, and it can also be fraught Source: Bateman, 1992 politically. How can these external ben­ efits be 'internalised' such that Coillte or the private investor can capture the columns (vi) and (vii), the situation in benefits? Unless such internalisation this regard is where the forest is used takes place, the investment (path clear­ to produce wood alone is shown. In the ing, sign posting, picnic and camp site case of the combined product, the for­ provision etc.) needed to provide the est can, up to a point, produce more optimum level of recreation will not be recreation and wood. Up to an input forthcoming. 'Optimum' in this context is the provision of recreation and other level of 20, the production of wood and forest goods and services such that the recreation are complementary in that gap between benefits and costs, i.e. net both can increase. However, there­ benefit, is maximised. But for the forest after, recreation can only be increased owners to give appropriate weight to if wood output is decreased - the uses recreation, they must get a 'signal' are competitive. It can be seen that net which encourages them to give it due output is greatest - at 10 units - at input weight. level 30, yielding 30 units of recreation Let us look at a highly simplified and 10 units of wood. If the forest is hypothetical example below: In used to produce wood alone, then the columns (i) through (v) in Table A2, optimum input level is 20, with a net of the forest is used to produce wood and six. recreation; the costs and outputs are A few points are notable: shown for various levels of input. It is assumed that the inputs and outputs • In practice, we know very little are all measured in the same units. In about the Production function for

65 IRISH FORESTRY

Table A2. Input Recreation Wood Total Net Wood Only Output Hypothetical (Costs) Output Output Output Output Gross Net Combinations of (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) (vii) Recreation and (ii) + (iii) (iv)-(i) (vi)-(i) Wood Output from a Forest. 10 0 5 5 (5) 5 (5) 20 10 15 25 5 26 6 30 30 10 40 10 33 3 40 33 9 42 2 38 (2)

forest recreation, the outputs visitors to forests. Deferred demand is which would be yielded by differ­ the result of people placing an 'option ing levels of input, and we know value' on forest recreation whereby very little about the trade-offs, if they value forestry simply because any, involved in producing more they know the facility can be availed of recreation and less wood (or other in the future by themselves or future outputs). generations (the 'bequest motive'). Potential demand for forest recreation • It is clear that ifthe recreation out­ can result from a number of factors put noted in the example above including technological or socio-eco­ could not be captured by the forest nomic change. Altruism can playa role owners (and if there were no other such that people obtain some value outputs the benefits of which they from knowing that others enjoy this could capture) they will produce facility. wood, yielding a net benefit of 6, There are a number of methods instead of the 10 yielded by the available to value a non-traded good combination. such as forest recreation. Amongst these are: This illustrates why it is so impor­ tant to somehow 'reward' the forest Contingent valuation owner for producing the socially cor­ This method collects preference infor­ rect level of recreation, defined in this mation by way of a survey in an case as the level, combined with other attempt to measure the willingness of output, which maximises net benefits. individuals to pay for an increased (or It also illustrates the need to derive a decreased) provision of forest recre­ value for recreation which represents ation. The question posed to somehow the value society places on individuals in the survey might be as the experience provided and availed of. follows: "It is suggested that a National Park Measuring the value be established. This would allow locals of forest recreation and visitors to take scenic walks, hunt, Demand for recreation can be subdi­ pick berries etc. The project will be vided into three types of demand financed by a general income tax. (Benson and Willis, 1991). Effective Would you as a citizen be willing to demand is measured by the number of incur an A % increase in income tax to

66 IRISH FORESTRY

finance such a scheme?" If the answer is Appropriateness of no, the tax change is decreased until measurement methodology willingness to pay (WTP) is established. Both the Contingent Valuation and Hedonic Prices approaches would Travel cost make it difficult to distinguish This uses individuals' actual behav­ between externalities and so make it iour rather than what they say they difficult to isolate WTP for recreation. will do. Demand for a recreation site There are many factors involved in the can be measured by the costs of travel purchase of a house apart from prox­ to that particular site. Assume there is imity to a forest let alone recreational a single forest that can be reached by use. Studies have been done in Britain to estimate the value of total external individuals in a certain area. The area effects from forestry using hedonic can be divided into a number of zones prices (e.g. Garrod and Willis, 1992), according to distance from the forest, but it is generally felt that the Travel say, zones A and B. The number of Cost Method is more useful since it can trips per capita and the average travel isolate recreation more easily. How­ cost for these trips from zone A and ever, the assumption that utility is zone B (which is further from the park) uniform across visitor categories is are calculated by surveying those very strong and limiting. attending the forest park from these The main problem with the Contin­ areas. Sets of observations like these gent Valuation Method is that there is can be used to estimate a "distance an incentive to "free-ride". If con­ decay curve for trips" which is nega­ sumers have to pay according to their tively sloped such that the farther away stated willingness to pay, they may try from the forest a community is situ­ to conceal their true willingness to pay ated, the higher cost and the fewer the in order to qualify for a lower price. visits, all else equal. Average consumer However, if respondents believe that surplus from a visit to the forest park the price or the tax charge is unaffected from areas A and B is calculated from by their response, they may have an the curve and total aggregate willing­ incentive to overstate their WTP ness to pay for the forest is given by (Johansson, 1992). While the Contin­ total consumer surplus plus actual gent Valuation Method explicitly states the aim of valuing recreation to travel cost. The assumption is implicit those completing the questionnaire that the visitor who travels farthest, i.e. there is the risk that individuals may incurs the greatest travel cost, is at the intentionally or subconsciously take margin; they would not have left home other external effects or prejudices for for this facility if they knew that they or against forestry into account when would be charged an admission. answering, and people mayor may not take into account the opportunities Hedonic prices forgone by using the forest for recre­ This method involves deriving some ation. The Travel Cost Method is indication of the value of a forest by likely to provide a lower bound on the comparing prices of housing identical value of recreation since it seems fair to in all respects apart from distance from assume that the value of recreation to a forest. individuals must be worth a sum that

67 IRISH FORESTRY

is at least equal the cost of getting to value of the Forestry Commission the forest. Problems arise in that estate from £53 million to £9 million unlike the Contingent Valuation per annum. Garrod and Willis (1992) Method this travel cost cannot capture use the Travel Cost Method to estimate option values or altruism. There are consumer surplus of non-priced open­ also likely to be variations in tastes, access recreation and valued it at incomes, etc. across the population £8.665m. They suggest that since peo­ zone used to estimate the distance ple only visit forests for recreational decay curve. purposes once or twice per year on average, recreational aspects of forestry Practical examples of don't enter into household's location forest recreation valuation decisions. While the estimates are seen Bateman (1992) gives a useful outline to be widely variable, it does show that of studies which attempt to put a value there is some justification for on recreation in the UK. In 1972 the Government subsidy, i.e. grant UK Treasury used surveys of car num­ schemes, purely in relation to recre­ bers at forest parks and applied an ational value. McGilvray and Perman imputed parking fee which resulted in (1991) suggest that few estates can rely a figure of £1.32 million (approxi­ upon income from sporting use alone. mately equal to £9 million in 1990 With returns to agriculture decreasing values). In 1986 the National Audit and forestry investments not being Office estimated the value of informal particularly attractive the combination recreation to be nOm using the same of agriculture and/or forestry with technique. The indirect technique of recreational use may be necessary to using a parking fee is unlikely to cap­ maintain viability. However, the social ture total benefit from or willingness opportunity cost ofland is rising as the to pay for recreation. Benson & Willis' derived demand for recreation on open (1990, 1992) study using the Travel land increases. Cost Method places a value of £53 mil­ In May 1987, a face to face survey lion (1988 prices) on recreation in the was carried out amongst a sample of total Forestry Commission estate and 499 Dutch householders to estimate the results are shown in Table 5 of the the social costs of damage to forests main text. This study was undertaken and heathlands which was assumed to to justify the subsidisation of the take place in the future if air pollution Forestry Commission's losses despite was not reduced. The central question government funding of £30 million. was what Dutch people would be will­ In response to the criticism that ing to pay to avoid a further some visitors may view their costs as deterioration in the National Forests petrol alone while others may take time and heathlands. It was assumed that and car running costs into account, recreational and aesthetic values of the Willis & Garrod (1991) undertook forest would be significantly reduced another study using the Travel Cost in the event of the deterioration taking Method based on petrol costs alone. place. On average, respondents were This produced a startling reduction in willing to pay 11 (1987) ECUs per recreation value per visit from approxi­ month (with a median value of 5 ECU mately £2.00 to £0.60 and a consequent per month). This mean value reduction in the total annual recreation amounted to 689 million ECU (1987)

68 IRISH FORESTRY

for Dutch society as a whole (van der the Potential, UCD Environmental Institute, Linden and Oosterhuis, 1988). Dublin, 1989. The very high Dutch values are a Cospoir, Walking Routes (Ireland), 1994. Deane, Brian, and Henry, Eamon, The Eco­ reflection in part of the high popula­ nomic Impact of Tourism, Irish Banking tion density, high levels of income, Review, Winter 1993. education and environmental aware­ Department of An Taoiseach,1992 and the ness, and the relative paucity of forest. Tourism Sector, EUROPEN Series, March In Sweden, where forests are pervasive, 1990. and farm land is relatively scarce, there Drake, L., The Non-Market Value of the is a willingness to pay to prevent half Swedish Agricultural Landscape, Mimeo­ graph, Department of Economics, University or all of agricultural land to be con­ of Agricultural Sciences, 1987. verted to spruce forests (Drake, 1987). Economist, February 5th-11th 1994. Forestry Commission, Woodland Grant Peter Clinch and and Frank 1. Convery, Envi­ Scheme, Forestry Commission, Edinburgh, ronmental Studies, University College Dublin. April 1993. Forest Service, Planned Recreational References Forestry: guidelines for grant applications, Bateman, 1., The United Kingdom, in Wibe S. Department of Energy (Forest Service), and Jones T. (eds.), Forests: Market Interven­ Dublin, December 1992. tion and Failures, Earthscan, London, 1992. Garrod, G., and Willis, K., Amenity Value of Benson, J., and Willis, K., The Aggregate Woodland in Great Britain: A Comparison of Value of the Non-Priced Recreation Benefits Economic Estimates, Environmental and of the Forestry Commission Estate, Forestry Resource Economics 2: 415-434, 1992. Commission, Edinburgh, 1990. Government of Ireland, Forestry Act, Sta­ Benson, J., and Willis, K., The Demand for tionery Office, Dublin, 1988. Forests for Recreation, Forestry Occasional Hutchinson W. and Chilton S., How Site Spe­ Paper 39, Forestry Commission, Edinburgh, cific are Rural Environmental Benefits for 1991. Forest Recreation?, paper presented to the Benson, J., and Willis, K., Valuing Informal Agricultural Economics Society Annual Con­ Recreation on the Forestry Commission ference, University of Exeter, April 1994. Estate, Bulletin 104, Forestry Commission, Johansson, P., Cost-Benefit Analysis of Envi­ Edinburgh,1992. ronmental Change, Cambridge University Bord Failte, Developing Sustainable Press, Cambridge, 1992. Tourism, Dublin, December 1992. McGilvray, 1. and Perman R., Sporting and Bord Failte, Tourism Facts, Dublin, July Recreational use of Land, Forestry Occasional 1993. Paper 43, Forestry Commission, Edinburgh, Boyle, K., and Storey, D., Report on a Survey 1991. of Amenity Forest Users at Six Forests in the Northern Ireland Forest Service, Annual Report Greater Dublin Area and on the Impact of 1992/93, Department of Agriculture, 1994. Forest Recreation on the Residents of Pearce, D. (ed.), Macmillan Dictionary of Enniskerry, Co. Wicklow, unpublished report Modern Economics, Macmillan, 1992. for the Forest Service, 1993. Scully, Brendan, National Monuments and Convery, F. J. and Clinch 1. P., Forestry as a Historic Properties, Paper presented at con­ Land Use in Ireland in Fenton, A. and Gill­ ference on Investing in Tourism, University mor, D. (eds.), Land Use Issues on the College, Dublin, March 29, 1994. Atlantic Periphery of Europe: Scotland and Tourism Development International Ltd, 1993 Ireland, Royal Irish Academy, Dublin, in Visitor Attractions Survey, January 1994. press. van der Linden, J. W., and Oosterhuis, F. H., Convery, F. J, Irish Forest Policy, NESC The Social Valuation of the Vitality of Forest Report No. 46,1979. . and Heathlands, Leidschendam, Ministry of Convery F. J., Flanagan, S. and Parker, A. J., Housing, Physical Planning and Environ­ Tourism in County Wicklow - Maximising ment, the Hague, 1988.

69