The Cabinet of Ministers will have to decide on forest management regulations, weighing up the arguments of all parties. Given that the public discourse is dominated by alarmist warnings of apocalyptic deforestation, I consider it important to draw attention to the “other side of the coin”. Why should such scaremongering be considered populist and misleading, and why would the new regulations actually benefit the quality of Latvia’s forests, the environment, and, of course, the national economy?

·         Compared with other European forestry powerhouses, Latvia is the only one that has not modernised its forest management regulatory documents, thereby losing competitiveness. In countries with a similar forest structure to Latvia, requirements are considerably more balanced and sensible. For example, in Finland and Sweden, there are no diameter restrictions, while in Estonia, they are significantly lower. This has not degraded environmental quality or the sustainability of the forest sector in those countries.

·         Latvia’s forest area has been increasing since both the time of the first Latvian Republic and since the restoration of independence. Compared to 1923, when forest cover in Latvia was 23% of the total territory, it had more than doubled by 2018. A gradual increase in forest area can also be seen over the last ten years. In 2018, forests in Latvia covered an area of 3.04 million hectares (ha), or 52% of the land territory.

·         Reducing the felling diameter (dbh) will only affect 5% of Latvia’s forests. The amendments to the regulations apply only to private forests. State-owned forest territories will not be affected, as they are subject to an entirely different regulatory framework. It should also be remembered that almost 30% of all forests in Latvia are located in protected areas, where logging does not and will not take place. Calculations by forest scientists suggest that logging areas might increase by only about 1,600 ha per year.

·         The new regulations provide for stricter conditions for reforestation, improving forest quality and value in the long term. When felling trees based on diameter, forest owners will be obliged to reforest with high-quality planting material. Currently, it is possible to wait for the trees to seed themselves. Although this will be much more expensive for the owner, planting trees will ensure optimal growing space for each tree, with sufficient sunlight and nutrients to fully realise its (genetically determined) growth potential in both height and thickness.

·         For certain categories of stands, the felling diameter will be increased. Previously, there were site indices for birch where final felling could be carried out if the diameter was between 22 and 31 cm; the new regulations set it at 25 cm. Pine could be felled from 27 to 39 cm. Now, it is set at 30 cm. Thus, in certain forest types, trees will be allowed to grow for longer.

·         The number of old trees that maintain and ensure biodiversity will increase. In at least a third of pine forests, there will be more large trees, because the permitted diameter there will not be reduced, but increased! Furthermore, the minimum number of ecological and dead trees that must be left per hectare will be increased from 5 to 8 ecological trees and from 4 to 10 dead trees.

·         Young trees will not be felled. All tree species will reach the new, reduced permitted felling diameter no earlier than at 60 years of age. The area of young stands correlates with the volume of felling, as clear-felled areas must be regenerated within 3 to 5 years. By simplifying the diameter for trees by a few centimetres, the volume of available felling areas increases, allowing for a choice to harvest what is economically more profitable and environmentally safer at that moment.

·         The amendments will help to achieve climate policy goals. Only high-quality saplings will have to be planted in the forests. A forest regenerated in this way will sequester up to 20% more CO2 than one regenerated naturally. It is clear that these new forests will sequester even more CO2 in the future.

·         This means support for a Latvian industry rich in tradition and additional tax revenue for the state, which can be invested, for example, in science and education. Latvian forest stands that have reached the age or diameter for final (harvest) felling hold a total of more than 200 million m3 of timber, which in monetary terms is 4.79 billion euros. In terms of the amount of deadwood per hectare of forest, Latvia ranks third in the European Union. France and Slovakia have higher volumes of deadwood than Latvia. The latter only managed to “surpass” Latvia in this parameter because, after the damage caused by the great storm of 2004, the Slovaks agreed to the requests of environmentalists to leave the storm-damaged wood in protected natural areas to decay; this action later resulted in a serious battle for Slovakia against a bark beetle infestation. Such accumulations of deadwood mean that we can manage our forests much more efficiently, and it is time to do so!

For Latvians, the forest has always been special; it is an essential part of our identity. The Ministry of Agriculture is aware that any changes to tree felling regulations can trigger an emotional public backlash. However, we urge people not to rush and to delve into the essence of the matter! In our view, the populist position voiced by “environmentalists” in the public space does not correspond to reality and is not in the interests of Latvia’s growth, its environment, or its people.