[ad_1]
From: TT
Published:
Photo: Janerik Henriksson / TT
Neither forest owners nor the environmental movement are really satisfied with the Forest Research proposal. Stock Photography.
Criticism comes from everywhere. Neither forest owners nor the environmental movement are satisfied with Forest Research.
– I don’t think we have gone all the way, neither in terms of the purpose of strengthening property rights or clarifying how we should achieve our national and international environmental goals, says Johanna Sandahl, president of the Swedish Society for Conservation of Nature.
The organization sees the risk that nature conservation work in the forest will become more difficult if the research proposal becomes a reality.
– It is problematic that the main protection model is that the owners themselves have to inform which forest will be protected, says Johanna Sandahl.
– There may be interest on the part of forest owners, but there is a risk that small areas will be protected. Nature conservation work is often based on the need for fairly large and cohesive areas for values to be maintained.
Critical forest owners
One might think that forest owners are more accepting of the proposal to set aside forests. But LRF Skogsägarna is also critical.
– The question is how much volunteering there will actually be, says Paul Christensson, president of LRF Skogsägarna.
It means that around half a million hectares of forest near the mountains will be protected from forestry; an area larger than the entire county of Västmanland. In addition, an additional 150,000 hectares will be protected.
He also does not believe that the investigation lives up to directives to protect and strengthen private property in the forest by strengthening legal security.
– When we look at the general proposals, we do not really believe that they fulfill them, in the way we expected, says Paul Christensson.
Old conflict
A long-standing issue of conflict is an inventory of extra-protected forest areas, so-called key biotopes, something that landowners have been very critical of. It is now proposed that the Swedish Forestry Agency put an end to this and that the existing record be erased from previous assessments.
This is something that receives criticism from the environmental movement.
“The fact that the research completely abandons the concept of key habitat increases the risk that the high values of nature will disappear and it will not make it any easier for owners,” says Linda Berglund of the World Wide Fund for Nature in a comment .
She believes that there is a risk of undermining certification as a tool and that then Swedish forest products will have a harder time competing internationally.
Does not loosen knots
If the environmental movement wants to highlight positive proposals in research, it will be proposed that such large parts of the forest be protected near the mountains. Another proposal that receives the go-ahead is to appoint a scientific council for biological diversity in the forest.
Neither the Swedish Society for Nature Conservation nor the Forest Owners believe that the research proposal will resolve the fundamental conflict between nature conservation, property rights and production.
– Politics must take a step forward. There are real trade-offs here to be made between several different interests, says Paul Christensson.
Published:
