An interview with Gatis Cukmacis, forester and Burtnieki Municipal Council deputy

When talking about territorial reform, the idea that many small municipalities are actually quite strong! (Self-sufficient!) is rarely voiced publicly.

One can certainly say that the Burtnieki municipality is self-sufficient! That is how I personally view us in the municipality. The proximity of Valmiera—a large city—is, of course, distinctly felt, and most of the municipality's residents are connected to the city, whether through work, studies, or something else. The city always “pulls you in”, so to speak.

Reform… To us, the rural residents, and to me personally, it does not seem like things will be better or worse… Nothing much will change, but there will be less focus on us! That is how it looks at the moment!

The plans prepare Burtnieki for a merger with the city of Valmiera and the surrounding municipality. During the meeting with Minister Juris Pūce, unfortunately, it was a one-way street. The Ministry called the meeting a “consultation with municipal deputies”, but it looked like everything had already been decided among the “powers that be”, and there was “no point in pushing back or objecting”. Instead of consultation, we just listened to information about what is coming.

Do they also consider the discussion with ministry representatives to have been a failure in Burtnieki?

There was no discussion! There were a few monologues from the ministry representatives. Our municipal council leader had only five minutes to speak. I cannot call that a normal, serious conversation about the changes that could affect so many!

When the government’s plan for the upcoming reform was released, did you yourselves in the municipality have any ideas or plans: which neighbours could merge, who wants to stay alone, who is better to choose?

The Burtnieki municipality is by no means the smallest in Latvia! We can provide all the necessary services! The municipality has quite a few parishes—six—and enough residents. Yes, we do not have a local secondary school, but having one “just for the sake of it” is not necessary, because Valmiera is close! So to speak: why have your own if your neighbours have enough and we also get a share! At the beginning of the reform idea, a thought about a “municipal circle” around Valmiera flickered in conversations with neighbours, but this idea did not develop further!

I think the current municipalities will be merged into larger ones; whether we like it or not, I doubt we will be able to resist. On the other hand, it does not look like anyone is ready to listen to our opinion, let alone take it into account! In my view, for a certain part of the population, as I mentioned before, there will be no major changes—just the current or another municipality, only larger. I am concerned about whether we—the rural people—will be heard, listened to, and our ideas agreed with in a larger municipality. Valmiera is large, the team of deputies will certainly change, but—how many of the newly planned council deputies will represent the countryside (how many representatives will be elected from outside the city)? There is a real possibility that the city will “simply eat us up”.

Speaking even of an important sector—construction. Valmiera has large buildings (major projects), and so do we! I personally heard criticism from the State Audit Office about large and expensive buildings in municipalities… We have an “expensive” culture house in Ēvele, and the same in Matīši; the investments are large and will never pay off, but they are intended for the residents of the municipality. The same goes for the sports field in Rencēni. Construction in Valmiera has also been quite extensive, and—if we look from the city's perspective—building a sports field outside in a parish would not be wise; if we look from the parish residents' point of view—why head to the city if we have our own!?? Understandably, the municipality does not have as many residents as Valmiera, but we have enough people using the existing infrastructure! Nothing has happened or been built with a short-term mindset; construction has proceeded in a planned, thoughtful, and purposeful way. Even before the previous reform, when there were only parishes in Latvia, we began building the “Burtiņš” kindergarten near the Valmiera border. The investments were large, but now the kindergarten is full and needs an expansion! Of course, one can always want more, but it would be a sin to complain about the lack of the younger generation in Burtnieki!

Burtnieki municipality and forests!

We have enough forests! The municipality (local government) owns about 650 ha! There are also plenty of other forest properties—both state and private. I must say, the municipality has little say regarding forests (excluding, of course, those owned by the municipality); the local government does not interfere in these matters.

How do property owners in the municipality fare with bans and restrictions?

I have the impression that so-called “green people” or nature conservationists mostly live in Riga, and their understanding is distinctly urban. For example, recently a habitat—a natural meadow—was found (determined) on my property. What should I do now? It seems I should follow the recommendations and instructions of the professionals: how to mow, how to maintain, how…

But! 30 years ago, no one taught or showed me how to act. Today, there is a meadow here, and it is considered biologically valuable! I understand and conclude—I have been working and operating correctly for three decades! Does this meadow need to have a restriction or a ban (additional protection) set upon it, if I have been managing it properly for a considerable time? I consider such action (the setting of a ban) to be exaggerated! I can say the same about the alarm: “Look, the forests are being logged…” Wait, wait! If a forest has reached the felling age, and I think every owner manages their own forest, if it is time to cut—we cut and plant a new one! Someone arrives from the city and looks—where they gathered mushrooms or berries last year—the forest (the big trees) is gone! Everything… logged! Not at all! The forest has only changed its form, the owner is managing it there, will plant a new one, there will never be a “desert” there, everything will continue! The saying about logged-out forests and a desert in Latvia is completely false—we will never have a desert! Nonsense!

I tend to compare forests to an hourglass and the moment you look at it: the clock is, was, and will be; only the amount and shape of the sand change—more, less, up, down. Also in the forest—you remove the old, there will be space for the new! Important and significant things should not be exaggerated, because that can ruin good intentions!

A forest owner must be given greater freedom so that they are the true and only master of their own forest! There is no need to indulge in unfounded fears about logging or plundering. An owner will never harm the forest or themselves. It is their asset, or as they say on the radio: a bank!