On 25 October, a field session of the Forest Advisory Council (MKP) was held in Gauja National Park, chaired by Minister of Agriculture Armands Krauze.

During the session, damage caused by the European spruce bark beetle was inspected and the management of sites of public importance was discussed. Those present saw both what a forest compartment looks like eight years after an infestation by the European spruce bark beetle, and were able to compare it with a similar compartment that the beetle had not touched. Management issues concerning private forests located within the territory of Gauja National Park were also discussed.

In more than one beetle-affected stand a rather bleak picture is to be seen, namely, dead, standing spruces that are gradually falling... As is well known, scientists have stated clearly that the only way to destroy a bark beetle focus in such cases is to fell the spruces and plant new ones. Over eight years, a high-quality, verdant stand has turned into a somewhat bleak wasteland reminiscent of a lunar landscape. Is the delight of the nature conservation officials at this sight genuine, or is it based on the job description – that is – the regulation states that this is good, and so – we rejoice... Do we, really?

Is this what we need for biological diversity? Is this what we need in Gauja National Park? Is the bark beetle a problem to be preserved in the name of environmental protection, one that affects not only the territories intended for conservation purposes but the neighbours as well, and spreads further afield?

Visiting the property of forest owner Jānis Driba, the MKP representatives became convinced once again, as they have over the past ... years, of an unresolved problem – the owner, his property, his plans and... the status of a habitat (a protected area), guarded by local officials as though they were standing at the mausoleums of once-influential people. Spruces finished off by the bark beetle are still, in someone's view, a forest rich in herbaceous plants and ... full stop.

Assessing national policy on this matter, one has to conclude that a property may lose its value (for which only the owner is answerable), a property may lose its visual appeal (which delights those responsible in their offices, since they neither see it nor own it), a property may disappear altogether – and this is the concern of the owner alone, the one unlucky enough in where their property happens to lie.

What is to be done? First – on no account allow anyone to deal with your property senselessly, and do everything possible to have the legislation changed in this respect. Second – after more than a decade of floods of words (promises of compensation and cooperation are still an empty shell), get down to work and begin mutually beneficial cooperation with forest owners. Third – remember that national security policy is most directly bound up with the country's people.

In Māris Liopa's photographs – what was seen at the MKP field session