Latvia is a wondrous land! It seems impossible to surprise anyone with this news anymore, but the fact that the quality of living in the country will soon be measured by a farmland/forest bird index could make Latvia, perhaps, the first and only place in the world where such an index is used in this way...

This is not fake news!!!! Because the “challenges” section of the draft National Development Plan (NDP) for 2021–2027, under “Nature and Environment”, mentions forestry policy and CO2 sequestration opportunities, with total GHG emission intensity relative to GDP and the farmland/forest bird index mentioned as indicators. The state is seemingly composed of two important cornerstones – the people who live in it and the territory – but until now, it hadn't been noticed that birds are more important than people. But fine! If the “great” policy-makers believe that the bird index is the “right” indicator, we should certainly start thinking about birds in good time, and not just in the abstract, but by preparing concrete directions for action: how to increase the number of birds in Latvia, definitely and unambiguously earmarking European Union co-financing for this purpose, and perhaps even creating a special inspection or service directly responsible for this index, while at the same time granting those working in this service very specific powers to be incorporated into local legislation.

First of all, though, I would very, very much like to understand what this farmland/forest bird index is currently – in December 2019 (who determined it, what were the initial parameters, for example, what it was in 2000, what it was in 2015, has it changed and, if so, why). Does this index change somehow from month to month, because, after all, bird migration exists – in the autumn, many a winged creature heads to warmer lands, as a result of which, of course, the number of farmland/forest birds in the territory will fall rapidly every autumn, while in the spring, when the migratory birds return, it will increase rapidly!!! There are migratory and transient birds, there are rare visitors and resident birds... To avoid misunderstandings, we should have clarity now on how we will act, because after all, for at least five or six months each year, the environmental quality of life will “go” downhill. Of course, if there is a problem, it needs solutions, and therefore funds must certainly be found from the generous state purse for researchers who could study the situation and offer the best solutions to mitigate the massive fluctuations in the farmland/forest bird index. It can already be safely said that one of the proposals could be to “attract” birds specifically to Latvia, especially those that “come” (by flying, of course!) to winter with us from climatically colder regions. Admittedly, it is not really clear how that could be done. However, there are other solutions! After all, in Latvia, there are birds that do not fly away and live here all the time — crows, magpies, sparrows, ravens, gulls, and others (the only question is whether these are considered farmland/forest birds, or are they birds of populated areas), which means it is necessary to encourage these birds to breed. How to do that? Create the best possible conditions – the simplest being to feed them – by placing food in courtyards, squares, and parks every day specifically for these birds (resident birds). Yes, many different birds are usually found in landfills, which in the context of the bird index would be a great solution, by purposefully increasing the area of these landfills. At the same time, it is necessary to restrict the spread of “all sorts of predators” that are quite active in hunting and eating birds. Thus, the wandering of domestic or “stray” cats should be restricted! To ensure this, all cats should be microchipped, and those not microchipped should be subject to eradication. In turn, the owners of unchipped cats should be subject to administrative liability – a fine of 500 to 2500 euros, depending on the annual income of the cat's owner. Such a solution would prevent social and income inequality, because low-income earners would pay a much smaller fine for their pet than high-wage earners. And in the end, some hundreds of thousands or perhaps even millions of euros would “fall” into the state budget.

Admittedly, there is a significant problem! ...what to do with hawks, owls, eagles, and falcons, which have a natural “habit” of hunting small birds. But to understand the seriousness of this problem and the solutions, of course, money is needed for research. To speed up the research, students could be involved, whose scientific research project topic could be the very counting and monitoring of birds living in farms, courtyards, and gardens.

To keep the farmland/forest bird index “in check” (in balance), land owners will most likely also have to limit their greed, because ploughing, harrowing, not to mention spraying, spreading mineral fertilisers, mowing or digging, and even clearing bushes, or even more so, felling forests, will have to be forgotten. This could only be done at the special time when such activities are permitted, and furthermore, while strictly observing all possible requirements. Nothing much needs to be invented, as most of the measures are already set for those landowners who manage territories subject to individual management regulations, which also specify when and what may be done, and also how to do it. If some paltry food processing industry ends up with less grain, vegetables, meat, or milk as a result of the above measures, it is a complete trifle compared to the possible and intended rise of the bird index. If anything: enterprising and energetic people from other countries will supply Latvia with food! On the other hand, forest owners must be honestly told that they could only fell trees for a few months of the year, and even then only in forests specifically set aside for felling where no birds have been seen in the last five years. Who will be able to determine that? Simply – if you want to fell a forest – you will place surveillance cameras in the relevant territory and its vicinity in good time, and they will certainly show: whether or not there are birds in the specific plot.

In this complex action plan, there are a few more nuances, namely, the issue would have to be addressed regarding unscrupulous subjects who, knowing nothing about Latvia’s “know-how” – the farmland/forest bird index – simply eat them (consume them as food), thereby destroying this index. We are talking about the inhabitants of those warm lands where Latvia's migratory birds go to winter. Obviously, several special supervision teams from Latvia will be needed to travel around all the villages of the potential “destroyer” countries of our farmland/forest bird index and explain – educate – that they should not eat the birds that arrive (Birds that live there on the spot – feel free to eat them!), because this causes huge damage to Latvia. To help the “locals” understand better, some “gifts” would also be needed.

Successfully implementing what has been described, interested parties from other countries would certainly come to Latvia to gain experience, and ultimately, Latvia could export its “know-how” to other countries. Of course, not for free, because our people would have become excellent consultants over time on how to measure the quality of human life not by the amount of euros in one's pocket, by labour productivity, the value added produced, or the size of state social benefits or pensions, but by the farmland/forest bird index. There is another solution: simply “replace” the farmland/forest bird index with a bird index, because then one could count and include chickens, roosters, turkeys, domestic geese and ducks, and even ostriches raised on local farms. Isn't that a great idea for Latvia to stand out on a global scale? Of course it is!