Finnish loggers are rushing to fell forests before new EU rules come into force
Finnish forest engineer Matti Jappila, standing next to a newly cleared site the size of seven football pitches, pointed to the growth rings on a stump – the age of the felled tree could be estimated at up to 300 years. “I have begun to systematically and timeously harvest these stands,” he explained.
Like many Finns, Matti Jappila fears that the forthcoming European Union (EU) biodiversity strategy, which aims to protect 30% of EU land, will make his forestry business “entirely unviable”.
In a report last year, the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) stated that the restoration of natural forests and drained peatlands, along with the improvement of the sustainability of managed forests, “generally increase carbon stocks and sequestration resilience”. In Finland, where forests cover about 75% of the land, Brussels' proposals have sparked outrage in the forestry sector, as well as splits in the government coalition. The centre-left government survived a vote of no confidence tabled by the main opposition parties over the government's stance on forests.
“The regulation proposed by the European Commission is very, very unfair to Finland,” opposition MP Saara-Sofia Sirén of the National Coalition Party told AFP. As is known, in June the European Union proposed a new Nature Restoration Law, which aims to restore 20% of natural areas, such as forests and wetlands, to the state they were in 70 years ago by the end of the decade.
…the thicket of boreal spruce and birch forest is filled with the loud sound of a saw, as Matti Jappila begins preparing another part of his property for logging in December – before the EU can force him to protect it…
The EU wants to restore 20% of natural areas by the end of the decade
“Very unfair. It is better to log the old spruce stands now rather than wait.” Matti Jappila says that passing on a forest to his children that has been in his family for three centuries will be “impossible” if a large area has to be designated as protected. “It is very worrying,” the forest owner said.
Finland's opposition parties argue that the forest-rich Nordic country will largely be forced to bear the full cost of the EU's plans. “The costs for Germany are estimated at 190 million (euros), while for Finland, which is a significantly smaller country, they are calculated at nearly one billion euros per year,” MP S. Sirén said. While acknowledging the need for better environmental protection, she noted that “it is important for Finland to decide on forestry policy at the local (national) level”.
The export value of Finland’s forest industry products in 2020 was 10.4 billion euros, which accounted for 18% of the country's total exports.
Finland is not alone in its concerns: in July 2021, 10 EU member states prepared a joint letter to the European Commission, expressing “deep concern” over the institution's initiatives.
“We reiterate that the responsibility for forests lies with the member states,” says the letter signed by Austria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Latvia, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Hungary. France and Sweden also object to the EC's actions; Sweden, which takes over the rotating EU presidency on 1 January, has announced that it plans to ensure that forestry issues are decided at the national level.
“Destruction of biodiversity”
The issue has also split Finland's five-party government coalition. The Greens, who support protection measures, have come into conflict with the Centre Party, which is traditionally a strong supporter of the forestry sector. After several days of squabbling before the vote, the coalition parties agreed on a critical stance regarding the EU measures.
Prime Minister Sanna Marin stated in parliament that the EU proposal “is not acceptable without significant changes”.
Professor of Forest Science at the University of Helsinki Jaana Back (Jaana Back) said that “there is no doubt that these (EC, EU) measures are necessary to curb the loss of nature and the destruction of biodiversity”. She emphasised that this will not happen “without active intervention” and pointed out that after ten years of promoting voluntary measures, the European Commission has found that forest protection “remains insufficient”. Professor J. Back explained that the intensive use of Finland's forests has led to a decline in species numbers, and forest growth has slowed, thereby reducing their ability to absorb carbon.
In May, Statistics Finland calculated that in 2021, Finnish land used primarily for agriculture and forestry became a net source of emissions for the first time, as the carbon sequestration of forests has decreased.
“The slowing down of growth is one of the factors why carbon absorption decreased, while the second factor is the increase in logging volumes,” noted Professor J. Back.