An interview with Valdis Kalns, a forest owner in Kurzeme

The forest property is “located” in three parishes in Kuldīga Municipality. If we count my children, this is the seventh generation of my family to live and work on this land! Looking at the property's history, my ancestors began farming there about 200 years ago, but we have been the owners since the 1870s, when the most successful farmers (after the abolition of serfdom) began to buy back the land belonging to the manor. My great-great-grandfather started paying, and by the First World War, 60 hectares had become ours. This area includes 29 hectares of forest. It is not a single contiguous plot due to local traditions; specifically, the landlords in the Kurmāle area sold both “dry” and “wet” land. Therefore, the forests are in both dry and wet growth conditions.

The centre of Kurzeme gives the impression of being a highland…

The slopes of the hilly area are very spring-fed – there is plenty of “moisture”!

The history of the property is clear. What has happened in the time since the 90s, when management resumed? It’s been nearly 30 years…

There have been many events, but… For the first 15 years, there was no major activity! We only harvested firewood from the forest on the property. Then came the great storm of 2005, which also “worked” in our forest; after it, we concluded that the volume of “felled” wood was quite large, and we sold it successfully during a period when prices had already “recovered”. At that time, I didn't know much about forest management because I was studying law at the Police Academy, but the situation in the forest forced me to get moving. Together with the Forest Owners Association and forest managers, I delved step-by-step into forest events and processes: I began to understand what needed to be tended and when, when to harvest the crop, and when the forest needed to be renewed. In 2009, we planted the first areas ourselves, and now 5-6 metre tall pines are growing there. We have carried out forest tending across almost all 29 hectares, and we also work in areas that are very wet. We make a lot of use of planting material, but we leave areas with small clearings to regenerate naturally. Conditions here are not good for spruce due to root rot, and the clearings are too small for pine to regenerate successfully, so – birch is the only option!

Regarding the wet areas – is a beaver at work, are there issues with drainage, or is it naturally wet?

As I mentioned, the property has local geological peculiarities, such as the ridge of the Kurmāle hill, from which many springs and small streams emerge. All of this could be sorted out with drainage, but another historical feature causes a problem – the embankment of the former Alsunga-Kuldīga-Aizpute narrow-gauge railway crosses the property right through the middle. It is well-built, a sturdy dam, and the water drainage regime has become more complex. Significant investment will be needed for drainage, and I consider it my big goal for the future. Cooperation with neighbours and other owners will be necessary; I won’t achieve much on my own in my relatively few hectares! Beavers must be dealt with regularly in cooperation with hunters.

The aforementioned railway embankment – there are no tracks, it can be put to good use!

It certainly can! The embankment serves forest management well. There are no access roads in the surrounding forest block, so it is possible to enter via the dam with a passenger car to check and inspect, and the forwarder doesn't have to drive alongside or through the fields.

Cooperation with neighbours on drainage works is still just in the planning stage...

It is an intention and involves large-scale tasks, including organisational ones, which I haven't tackled yet. But – it will definitely be necessary! As long as the stands are approaching cutting age, it is fine, but if a forest needs to be renewed in a certain area, things could go poorly without a regulated moisture regime... It is good that excess water can be drained into the nearby Veckuldīga stream.

It is understood that there are stands of different ages and different dominant species on the property. Some stands were blown down, others are being tended. There is almost everything in 29 hectares!

Exactly! There are also stands planted in the final years of the collective farms, which are not exactly high quality… Specifically – spruces that are already showing the effects of rot, but have not yet reached cutting age. The spruce is about 40-45 years old, and even during the tending stage, it was visible that every tree already had rot! They haven't lost all their growth potential yet; I suppose that with sanitary assessments, the areas could be improved little by little, slowly. If bark beetles cause trouble elsewhere – killing spruces “from the air” – we have a second “killer” – from the ground. In my opinion, the decision during the collective farm era to plant spruce in this area was not right, because the soil is sandy and pine would grow there successfully.

Forestry workers met in the Vidzeme region are thinking and preparing for the bark beetle with concern. How is it in Kurzeme?

Yes, people are more worried and louder about Tērvete and the Gauja National Park! In the Kurzeme side, there are isolated bark beetle hotbeds, but one must be ready for something more serious.

What does experience say about the struggle with bark beetles?

There are activities with pheromone traps where the insects are collected, but those would only be usable at an early stage. For damage counted in the hundreds or thousands of hectares, there will be no choice other than – to fell! The tragic events in the forest force one to get moving: in the Czech Republic, Šumava, about 10 years ago, and not so long ago in Poland, the Białowieża Forest, where, by waiting and not solving the problem for just a few years, they ended up in a serious predicament that affected about 100 000 hectares!

A hot topic at the beginning of the year – lynxes. How are things with them in Kurzeme?

My forests are quite close to the city, the lynxes don't reach us.

Returning to the properties – do pine, spruce, and birch mainly grow there?

That is correct! There is also a bit of aspen, but it is affected by the same problem as the spruce – rot. The cutting age for aspen is 41 years; I call them “birdhouses” because you only need to “push out” the rotten core and a birdhouse is ready. Of course, the odd tree grows untouched by rot, but… Growing aspen on my plots is not considered a rational use of land! To grow it for firewood only? That's not bad; perhaps in 20 years, thanks to CO2 quotas, firewood will have the value of sawlogs, but that is a different conversation.

For the most part, birch and pine grow in my forests. Speaking of pine, pine seedlings feel very good on my land! I walk through the stands several times a year. I do the tending work myself. I show my children how their forest grows!

Last year, both representatives of VARAM and the VMD pointed to the necessity of changing protection regulations from bans to cooperation! We wrote and spoke about this at zemeunvalsts.lv too. Do forest owners feel this, and how do you live alongside eagles and other large predators?

I personally have the honour of living alongside and getting to know the lesser spotted eagle! The nest is in a neighbour's forest, about 20 m from my property. A proposal to establish a micro-reserve was submitted. After researching the submitted materials and, to some extent, thanks to the development of the lesser spotted eagle species protection plan, I was able to express my position: namely, if the species has a population of about 4000 pairs and the highest number of individuals since 1988, and Latvia has the largest representation of the species on a global scale… then there is no basis for restrictions! If economic restrictions are also combined with shortcomings in the compensation system, where, for example, there are significant differences in compensation for the “nest owner” and “owners” of power line objects, you end up with a solid list of objections. I also pointed out the material losses that would be suffered in the event of a micro-reserve being established. The micro-reserve was not established. In my own economic activity, I plan to voluntarily leave a buffer zone for the nest; if the bird lives there, let it live! However, it must be emphasised here that the food base and its availability are more important for the bird! Near the forest block, there are fields worked by large farmers, and there are natural meadows. If we talk about the lesser spotted eagle, it has a choice of where to hunt! I want to emphasise that flying predators are very common in Kurzeme – every time you go from Kuldīga to Liepāja, you will meet at least three birds, on the edge of a field or on a pole, waiting for prey or observing it in flight.

I have not seen my “neighbour” in the nest, but it has been seen in flight! I have become involved in the activities of the Forest Owners Association precisely in connection with the development of the lesser spotted eagle protection plan. Specifically, it would be necessary to create a reasonable compensation system in Latvia that complies with the Constitution and civil law. If a restriction (ban) is total (100%) and a state institution determines it unilaterally, a clear compensation must exist immediately at the same time as the ban! This must happen simultaneously! It is clear that there are many natural values in Latvia! If micro-reserves were created for all species, commercial forests would certainly remain in the minority; we would have to think about how not to leave the Latvian economy empty-handed. But!!!! That should not be thought about by the forest owner, but by “green” organisations: with what will Latvia earn a living?!

Optimistic! Publicly, however, the call to restrict (create bans) is heard more often, forgetting about the finances without which most of the Latvian population cannot survive in the 21st century. Forest owners care about finances, because they don't receive them from projects or plans…

Latvia has Latvian resources, there are no others! If we look at the economy: the transit sector is having an increasingly difficult time for various, mostly political reasons, agriculture is holding on! Forestry is a very significant pillar of Latvia's economy, with a very large export share and very significant employment! Moreover, the jobs are also in rural areas, which gives Latvia the opportunity “not to be just the Pierīga region and a few large cities”! The offer of forest owners regarding the system of bans (restrictions) is as follows: it must be based on a voluntary agreement! For example, in the case of the lesser spotted eagle: if someone came to me and invited me to conclude a contract for 3-5 years, providing for compensation for certain restrictions, the resistance would certainly be much lower and disputes would decrease. At the moment, this idea is rejected.

Is it taken into account in this entire process that the forest can collapse and rot? Zemeunvalsts.lv's recent visit to Aura parish indicates that there is neither a forest nor a place suitable for a stork. Is there any long-term thinking about bans? The forest continues to grow, and you cannot explain to it – don't grow, wait, let the birds live!

I also don't know, but I would like to know what will happen “afterwards”! That would be homework for the legislators. Biological diversity will not become more diverse from not doing anything and banning things! For example, in capercaillie micro-reserves, habitat maintenance must be carried out and is being carried out; the undergrowth needs to be cleared so that capercaillies can move freely and notice in time a fox that has gone out hunting! Eagles similarly need to fly up to the tree, to the nest, and this will sooner happen in tended stands than in untended ones! I think that protection techniques must both be mastered and learned; one cannot limit oneself to the simplest ones. Currently, when there is such a sharp discussion between economic and environmental groups, where environmental “defenders” do not want to concede anything, wishing to replace normal regeneration cutting with peeling tree bark or controlled burning, we will not get ahead. Reflections that arise watching these disputes: in legal terms, forest property is not becoming more valuable, but is becoming a second-class property. If we look at forest land, agricultural land, and building properties, the public is allowed much in forests, including berry picking and mushroom gathering! In the regulation of agricultural lands, this is not the case, and it is doubtful that we can simply enter a private house and start doing something there. Free access to forests, as ecosystem services, leads to the public's attempts to teach forest management without fully seeing it! Forestry is strictly regulated, starting from proving the origin of planting material and determining the number of trees… All activities for the forest owner are regulated and subject to approval! We do it and perhaps understand it, but with new requirements being added on top, the property remains increasingly “evanescent”!

In civil law, its authors have included the idea that property is something from which to reap the fruits! If you must ask for permission every moment for these fruits, if some stranger in your property does not allow you to reap the fruits, forest property by its very essence begins to approach collective property!