Replanting Ireland: Parliamentary Debate and Expert Literature on Irish State Forestry 1922 to 1939

Replanting Ireland: Parliamentary debate and expert literature on Irish state forestry 1922 to 1939 Dissertation for a Doctorate of Philosophy Submitted to the School of Histories and Humanities Trinity College Dublin 2020 Supervisors: Professor Poul Holm and Professor Eunan O’Halpin Margaret Duff Garvey, BA (Mod) (TCD), DEA (UBO), MPhil (TCD) Declaration I, Margaret Duff Garvey declare that this thesis has not been submitted as an exercise for a degree in Trinity College Dublin or in any other third level institution in Ireland or internationally, and is entirely my own work. I agree to deposit this thesis in the University’s open access institutional repository or allow the Library to do so on my behalf, subject to the Irish Copyright Legislation and Trinity College Library conditions of use and acknowledgement. Signed:_______________________ Date:_____________ Permission to use this work is withheld for three years. Signed: _______________________ Date:______________ Abstract This research is focused on forest-related discourse in the Irish Parliament and in expert literature around the time of the foundation of the Irish state in 1922, in order to illuminate public and expert perceptions on state forestry development in Ireland. In contrast to most European Countries, but in tandem with the British Isles, Ireland committed its twentieth century tree planting program to North American conifer plantation development, recorded in Irish state forest histories. In the field of environmental history, this research queries the origins and assumptions of this successful program that has dominated Irish state forestry, while excluding native woodland development and public input. It addresses the challenges of locating and analysing sources that record views other than those of the institution. The research is based on analysis of forest-related parliamentary debates and questions from 1922 to 1939 using an innovative approach with the assistance of text coding MaxQDA software. The complexity of participants’ perceptions on trees, woods and their uses, on forest administrations, on the public, the state and on future forests is reflected in the extensive topics of interest identified in the analyses. These results guided the review of expert literature to illuminate topics less well recorded in the historiography of the period, such as trees and woods in the landscape, the traditional uses of woods and timber, inherited institutional legacies, the heritage of woods, and industrial wood opportunities, as well as conifer tree planting schemes and forest- related employment. The findings record a more complex course of Irish forestry history in Ireland, revealed as a matter of political authority of certain forestry practices rather than best practice or national imperatives. It identified a wealth of experience and concern about future forests amongst participants that included public representatives, Ministers, expert landowners and foresters. The research shows the legacy of inherited deforested landscapes and its effect on all participants, an environmental catastrophe that influenced the 1919 First Dáil Arbor Day objective of state-sponsored re- afforestation for nation-building and for local wood industries and industrial manufacturers. This was in contrast to the military goals of British state forestry to produce softwood timber for mines and construction. Arbor Day objectives inspired subsequent unsuccessful representation in the Irish parliament and in government. The research suggests that the dominant institutional view of the superiority of the non- native conifer plantation approach to state forestry was favoured by the effects of war and civil disturbance, the critical socio-economic conditions, and government dependency on its British experts. The neglect of native woodland development by the state was compounded by the absence of an agreed national forestry policy, fostering national amnesia about woodlands and their heritage in Ireland. Although this research does not address the latter half of the twentieth century, the findings imply that these dominant perceptions continued to influence state forestry. In reconsidering different values and assumptions around future state forests, the research approach provides a more inclusive contextual narrative of the foundations of Irish state forestry. This can contribute to broadening the present-day discourse on future development of state forestry at this time of rapidly changing climate. iii Foreword and acknowledgements This research has been a journey of discovery, both personally, as an Irish citizen who accepted non-native conifer afforestation without question, and professionally, in the exploration of the fields of history and natural resource management. My initial proposal to study the environmental history of Irish natural resources included fisheries as well as forestry, a plan which rapidly came up against personal preconceived assumptions about the sector and its history. It was this search for a more structured approach to resource management history which could contextualise perceived values that led me to the study of the foundations of state forestry in Ireland. The environmental history field has been key to the framing of this research in its facility of integration of the scientific and humanities aspects of this inquiry. It is hoped that this research will contribute to further discussion on the essential contribution of the historical perspective in natural resource management. This thesis would not have existed without the initial support for a cross- Departmental proposal from my supervisor, Professor Poul Holm who also was a patient guide through the thickets that grew up around the structuring of this research. My co- supervisor, Professor Eunan O’Halpin challenged my pre-conceived notions, assisted their translation into historical research practice, archives and sources. I am deeply grateful for their thoughtful consideration of ways and means of clarifying ideas, and their many reviews of thesis drafts. As my mid-term reviewer, Professor David Dickson contributed perceptive comments at a critical juncture of the research, for which I am very grateful. It is also important to acknowledge with appreciation, the major contribution of the examiners, Professor Paul Warde and Assistant Professor Katja Bruisch for their insightful comments that were a catalyst for a more accurate conceptualisation of the research. There were many constructive suggestions for this work which have added immeasurably to its conclusion. In particular, I owe a debt of gratitude to Dr Micheál Ó Cinnéide for his tireless encouragement and reading of drafts, generously sharing the benefit of his experience on the Dissertation journey as well as in water resource management; to Professor Noel Wilkins for his pertinent, thoughtful observations and suggestions on an early draft of the thesis; to Professor Áine Ní Dhubháin for her initial interest in the study and her helpful directions; to Associate Professor Anne Dolan for her counsel and support; and Minister Andrew Doyle for his interest in the research, and his experienced perspectives on trees, communities and the land. Ongoing conversations with colleagues helped to clarify many of the issues that puzzled me at various stages of my research, and I would like to thank particularly Assistant Professor Francis Ludlow, Assistant Professor Katyja Bruisch, Dr Cordula iv Scherer and Dr Ruth Brennan for their helpful observations. Fellow students have been very much appreciated for their good humour and wisdom, especially Patrick Hayes, and Al Mathews for their technical assistance, and Zhen Yang . To other members of the Environmental Humanities Centre, I am grateful for their positive encouragement and enthusiasm, Richard Breen, Joanne D’Arcy, and Dr Marisa Ronan. For great assistance on digital photographic collections, I would like to particularly thank fellow student Joan Kavanagh. To colleagues Dr John Porter, Dr Elspeth Payne, Michael Lynch and Patrick McCourt, I have valued their listening ear and helpful discussions, particularly Dr Alex Tierney. I am very grateful for the many people who have added to this research, particularly Declan Little for his initial guidance, Gerry Paterson for sharing his love of trees and his years of forestry experience, Fergal Mulloy for his introduction to the environmental aspects of state forestry and Graf Franz Walburg his experienced forestry perspective. I am grateful to Peter Healy for his knowledge of local history. For access to the research materials, I would like to thank the staff of Trinity College Dublin Library for their assistance with Queries, their suggestions and support. My particular thanks to Greg Sheaf for his continual technical support, above and beyond the call of duty. Also appreciated are the staff of Information Services, particularly David Hamill for his timely assistance. Thanks to the staff of University College Dublin library, the former Agricultural library staff, particularly Susan Smith who was very helpful, the staff of the National Library, the staff of the National Archives, the staff of the Military Archives, librarian Ann Rooney for her work on the former Coillte library and Mike Keane of COFORD, the staff of PRONI, and the staff of the Public Record Office, Kew, for their courtesy and assistance in tracking down elusive papers. The Oireachtas staff members, Charles Ahearne, and Maedhbh McNamara were generous in their helpful suggestions based

Load more