On 6 July this year, 17 Latvian agricultural sector NGOs signed and sent a joint letter to Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) urging them not to support the further progress of the proposed Nature Restoration Regulation during the vote scheduled for the EP plenary session on 12 July. In the letter, the agricultural NGOs emphasise that the requirements included in the proposals will negatively impact the Latvian economy as a whole, as they have been developed in a general manner for all EU member states, regardless of the individual and differing environmental situations in each country.
Guntis Gūtmanis, Chairman of the Board of LOSP: “Nature protection and conservation are essential and necessary – every farmer and forester will agree with that. However, it is important to implement these processes using appropriate instruments, fully evaluating the actual situation and all influencing factors so that the justification for the requirements and the resulting outcome are consistent with national needs and goals. Specifically, we call on MEPs not to support the further progression of the Nature Restoration Regulation proposal until an adequate, in-depth assessment of the economic, social, and financial impact on the agricultural, forestry, and fisheries sectors in member states, as well as the impact on food security, has been carried out.”
At the same time, it should be noted that Latvia supports the proposal’s primary objective of improving the state of species, habitats, and ecosystems to promote biodiversity conservation for the benefit of the climate and people. However, the nature restoration targets and timelines set out in the European Commission's (EC) draft regulation are ambitious, disproportionate, and costly, which will significantly affect the development of Latvia’s vital agricultural, forestry, and fisheries sectors.
Latvia is a member state with one of the lowest proportions of agricultural land (30% of total land area) in the EU. At the same time, Latvia is one of the few member states with a very high proportion of organic soils within its agricultural land structure.
The proposed regulation focuses on improving the environmental state and biodiversity in the European Union (EU) and its member states; however, it is crucial to also consider current developments in the EU and globally – the energy crisis caused by Russia’s war in Ukraine and its impact on global food availability. When implementing nature protection actions, a reduction in food production, whether in terms of territorial scope or total value, cannot be permitted. Food security must be excluded from target areas. Food security is a matter of national security for every member state and for the European Union as a whole. Furthermore, the European Commission has not carried out a comprehensive impact assessment, meaning no one has the slightest idea what will happen in reality if the regulation is approved.
There is also concern that the current draft of the regulation indicates that EU governing bodies wish to decide on land use in place of the owner; moreover, the regulation envisages the flooding of vast areas of Latvian land. “In our view, the European Commission has exceeded all norms of reason. The regulation provides for the flooding, or ‘restoring natural hydrological processes’, on organic soils. So, it turns out that while Latvia has invested millions over decades to install drainage systems and make land economically productive, the European Commission says these systems must be dug up and the land flooded. It is unlikely that anyone has considered that drainage systems are interconnected, and by digging up one section, roads, schools, and private homes elsewhere could be flooded. This regulation is ill-conceived, hasty, and essentially starts to strip away a landowner's right to use their land as they see fit,” emphasises Juris Lazdiņš, Chairman of the Board of Zemnieku saeima.
Like Latvia, the European Parliament’s Committees on Agriculture and Rural Development, Fisheries, and Environment have also highlighted the disproportionate requirements, the lack of an adequate comprehensive impact assessment on the agricultural, forestry, and fisheries sectors and food security, and have rejected the further progression of the proposal.
According to the information available to us, debates on this regulatory proposal could take place on 11 July from 09:00 to 11:50, with votes potentially occurring on 12 or 13 July.
The joint NGO letter was signed by:
- Guntis Gūtmanis, Chairman of the Board of the Agricultural Organisation Cooperation Council
- Juris Lazdiņš, Chairman of the Board of Zemnieku saeima
- Kaspars Melnis, Chairman of the Board of the Livestock Farmers' Association
- Indulis Jansons, Chairman of the Board of the Latvian Agricultural Cooperative Association
- Jānis Šolks, Chairman of the Board of the Central Union of Latvian Dairy Farmers
- Dzintra Lejniece, Chairwoman of the Board of the Latvian Pig Breeders' Association
- Ingrīda Krīgere, Board Member of the Latvian Peat Association
- Arnis Muižnieks, Chairman of the Board of the Latvian Forest Owners' Association
- Aiga Kraukle, Chairwoman of the Board of the Potato Growers and Processors Union
- Jānis Gaigals, Chairman of the Board of the United Association of the Latvian Poultry Industry
- Ināra Šure, Head of the Latvian Federation of Food Companies
- Sabīna Alta, Chairwoman of the Board of the Seedling and Peat Innovation Fund
- Marija Gailīte, Deputy Chairwoman of the Board of Latvijas Dārznieks
- Māra Rudzāte, Chairwoman of the Board of the Latvian Fruit Growers' Association
- Sandra Stricka, Chairwoman of the Board of the Farmers' Union
- Aivars Bernāns, Chairman of the Board of the Latgale Producing Farmers' Association
- Sandra Eimane, Chairwoman of the Board of the Latvian Young Farmers Club