By David Flanagan

As humanity grapples with the urgent need to address climate change and preserve biodiversity, restoring and expanding natural ecosystems has become a paramount priority. Two prominent approaches that have gained attention are replanting and rewilding. While both methods aim to regenerate their respective ecosystems, they differ in their strategies and outcomes. This piece seeks to delve into the nuances of rewilding and replanting in the Irish forestry sector.

The most popular approach to forest regeneration is direct planting of tree specimens or reafforestation in an area. This method involves actively planting tree seedlings or propagating forests through extensive human intervention. This approach can quickly establish forests therefore restoring degraded areas, countering deforestation, and creating new forested landscapes within a short time span.

This method gained popularity after the first world war where, in response to increased demand for timber, many forests were planted for this purpose. Many tree species were initially planted for commercial endeavours, but it became clear that not all species were economically efficient.  Optimising factors such as speed of forest maturity and timber quality slimmed down the number of species used with scant regard for the effects to local biodiversity.

Fast forward to recent decades, the wide-awareness of human-induced climate change has given forest regeneration a whole new urgency. That urgency is to rapidly expand forest coverage to act as a form of carbon sequestration, applying the brakes to our runaway greenhouse gas emissions. National and international afforestation policy has focused on delivering greater forest area. Ireland’s national goal is to have 18% forest cover by 2050 (currently 11.6%). Direct forest planting offers a rapid method to achieve these targets.

One may conclude that more forestry is good whatever the case may be, however, through an ecological lens, not all forests are necessarily beneficial. Commercially productive species such as Sitka Spruce have become the dominant species of Irish forests. While this species is not native to Ireland, it performs exceptionally well to our climate and ground conditions. Adding into the mix, a commercially focused grant system which favours non-native conifers means that nowadays conifer species make up almost 70% of Irish forest coverage. These are often concentrated in monoculture plantations, causing significant negative consequences for local and national biodiversity.

Forest floors of these monoculture spruce plantations have been repeatedly shown to be ecological and biodiversity dead zones. No clearer can this be seen than in my own locality where extensive financially-driven spruce plantations have become established in the area: minute details such as the absence of birdsong (a staple of our rich native woodlands) and a toxic bed of pine needles on the forest floor create an eerie atmosphere devoid of life. 

In terms of carbon sequestration, a report issued to the Department of Agriculture as mandated by EU legislation (commented on in a 2020 Irish Times article) illustrated that Irish forestry became a net emitter of greenhouse gases. While trees are one of the most effective means of absorbing carbon, a significant portion of carbon is stored in the soil. Therefore, through disturbing the soil during a mass planting of tree specimens, felling processes, and eventual timber harvesting, greenhouse gases are emitted. This leads one to question whether direct afforestation is the silver bullet it is often portrayed to be.

Given the drawbacks to direct afforestation, it is worth considering another approach to forestry – rewilding. In essence, rewilding is an approach that seeks to restore natural processes and enhance biodiversity by allowing nature to take its course. It involves minimal human intervention, focusing on creating the time and space for nature to restore itself.

In essence, rewilding is an approach that seeks to restore natural processes and enhance biodiversity by allowing nature to take its course. It involves minimal human intervention, focusing on creating self-sustaining ecosystems. Instead of planting specific tree species, rewilding emphasises the reintroduction of native flora and fauna, encouraging the revival of natural ecological interactions.

A limited number of specimens may be introduced (i.e. planting a limited number of native tree species) however, precedence is given to species already in situ and creating the environment for them to reproduce. After all, these specimens are adapted to the highly localised conditions of a specific area. Likewise, by having a variety of species, there is great genetic diversity in the area. This genetic diversity offers an insurance policy whereby the survival of the forest is protected from diseases that may affect a single species. Another advantage is that through the encouragement of native flora, non-flora species are attracted to the area. As seen in many rewilding projects, restoring natural habitats i.e. native woodlands, encourages animal and insect species to inhabit the area. If we are serious about addressing the biodiversity crisis, we need both the restoration of flora and fauna populations.

The recent publication of “An Irish Atlantic Rainforest” by Eoghan Daltun charts his journey to rewild over 70 acres of land on the Beara Peninsula in Cork. Daltun highlights the need for human involvement whether it be removing invasive rhododendrons or erecting fencing to exclude ravenous deer from destroying the fledgling forest. In all other cases nature takes the lead in the project. Daltun is candid about the labour and financial input required, but is proof that it can work. He also sprinkles in some cultural restoration as part of his journey which is yet another dimension of biodiversity restoration.

When it comes to forestry policy, there is no one-size-fits-all solution. While the need for timber will continue to exist, legislation and government funding must reflect the twin crises of climate change and biodiversity loss. We must make room for nature to restore itself to the magnificence it once held on this island. We must learn from past mistakes which have caused such damage to our local environment. But most of all, we must let nature lead us towards a sustainable and prosperous future. After all, trees have been on this planet for much longer than humans have!