A conversation with Aigars Orskis, from the landowners' association “Garkalnes meži”
The situation that has developed in part of the “Garkalnes meži” nature reserve in Garkalne Municipality is strange, not to say absurd.
Events began in 2003–2004. We acquired (or reacquired) the land in question during the late 90s and early 2000s. Suddenly, one day: “Wham! Your property is affected by a nature reserve!”
The Nature Conservation Agency (DAP) commissioned the development of a management plan for the reserve area, which was won through a tender process by the Environmental Consulting Bureau (VKB), which, as we know, is represented by a former DAP employee. This situation won't leave our minds as owners, because... in the close cooperation between DAP & VKB, there might not even be any grievances between them or serious analysis of information. Is it even possible to speak of a neutral or independent stance and understanding? One hand washes the other! It is a very classic situation in Latvia – especially in state and municipal institutions and those linked to them.
Now, as all 25 owners whose properties are directly affected and impacted by the reserve work together to resolve issues and operate collectively, analyzing what happened back then, we conclude that the designation and creation of the reserve (2003–2004) proceeded quite rapidly. Whether we could have influenced anything is unclear. We were told (later) that information had been sent to landowners, but... most owners did not receive it, and those making the decisions neither checked nor inquired as to whether people (the owners) were truly informed. By the way, landowners were not invited to participate in the decision-making or discussions regarding the creation of the reserve; the process took place without their direct involvement.
The decision to create the reserve was made, and what we find important is that people unrelated to these specific properties knew full well about the preparation and adoption of such a decision. For instance, as one landowner recounted, there was a desire and even offers to exchange land. Specifically: to swap an area in another part of the former parish for an area in the Jāņi village, where a reserve was soon established. By swapping the properties, they would effectively be “foisting off” the land, knowing what was coming in the near future (that it would be unusable in the future)!
The reserve was designated in a most peculiar way: there is a road, on one side of which local people have already built houses and are living, and there is the other side of the road “with the reserve”, which is the subject of the dispute between the landowners and the “restricters” (the Nature Conservation Agency). The forest structure on both sides of the road is very similar – effectively the same. As far as can be understood, experts have determined that the European roller (which is or was the main “object to be protected” by the reserve) surely knows and understands – here I am allowed to build a nest and forage, but on the other side of the road, no! By the way, in the early stages of the reserve, the talk was solely and exclusively about the protected European roller. Now, as time has passed, in the working group discussions we are talking about coastal wooded dunes, habitats, other bird species, and insects. A fact confirmed by a European roller researcher makes the situation even more suspicious and incomprehensible to the owners: these birds (European rollers) are currently not in the reserve! But – the reserve will be maintained!
Have the European rollers moved nearby?
There were attempts to maintain the European roller population artificially, by bringing in birds and luring them in various ways, but... the rollers didn't like it! The explanation for such actions is: we will introduce various motivating and stimulating measures, perhaps the European rollers will return.
“Perhaps and possibly” is a systemically common thing. It would be reasonable to have: either they are there, or they are not! Is this issue also being addressed in the protection plan development working group?
Out of 25 owners, four of us are actively working on the reserve-property issues, while the others have delegated us to represent their interests, which is why we usually go to the DAP and VKB as a group of four.
The experience with the plan's development working group has been very mixed. On one hand: it is acknowledged that in 2003–2004, when the reserve was designated, they “went overboard” and mistakes were made, but... this is immediately followed by suggestions: “Let's forget the past (the former), let's ‘close this book’ and start looking at a new one!” Hold on! That way we could decide to act in every inconvenient case! For example, we could suggest to Latvian courts that they forget the cases currently under their proceedings and start from scratch! Great, isn't it?
The Voronkov family has already been written about by “Rīgas Apriņķa Avīze” (please see the references). We said to the VKB and DAP representatives: correct the mistake for this family at least, who were “duped” the worst – a good deed will have been done, and the family (a large clan!) might return from Ireland. But! There are hopes for building permits, but (again, a but!!!!) it is not known in what form and with what content the binding document will be adopted and approved.
The most serious discussions in the working group have been, and are, about allowing owners to build houses on their plots, regardless of whether or not the foundations of old buildings can be found on that area (property). We agreed that if they don't allow the properties (plots) to be subdivided, they should just allow us to build. For example, for owners who own a small area, one house would be enough.
I will add that the sizes of the properties are very different: there are 2 ha, 3 ha, 4–5 ha, and there are people who own 12 and 18 ha. For example, an owner with 18 ha has building foundations every two hectares. So... Concluding that, the issue of linking construction to foundations was removed from the agenda, concluding that building might turn out to be overly dense. The properties I represent as an authorized person are two: 2 and 3 ha respectively, and both have old building foundations. To resolve the construction issue, in my opinion, a clear, mathematical principle is needed, not a different approach based on someone's personal discretion.
In the territory we are talking about, there was once a Soviet army base, and the foundations of barracks and hangars still remain there. On the plots belonging to several owners, the hangars themselves have also been preserved, which, with successful management, could even be converted; it is also possible to demolish them and build residential houses in place of the old foundations. The hangars are large – about 400 m2. In one of the recent meetings, we were already talking about the possibility (it is allowed that...) of building so-called twin houses on the existing foundations. It is a certain step towards us, but – nowhere is it said that this will be the final result and the final decision!
The most unpleasant way to refuse something is to delay the decision as much as possible. Litigation: that is time and a significant amount of money. The aforementioned protection plan development working group: what are they discussing there?
They are discussing what we want and what they want to restrict us from. One peculiarity, for instance, they tell us: we could allow building, cleaning up, but... you have to remove the construction waste present in the territory, and when that is done, you will be allowed to build. Stop! Some owners will remove the foundations and old buildings, others who live abroad might not know about it, will not start the work and... Those who have finished the work will again be left empty-handed! A well-hidden and invented collective responsibility.
So - they openly want the reserve territory to be tidied up at the expense of the owners.
Exactly! We have sort of accepted it (but have we reconciled with it?). Removing concrete blocks and everything else is not complicated. Not far away in Ropaži, all of that can be taken for crushing; it is just a matter of time and money. But! Effectively, a state institution imposes a reserve on a property, and to “pay” for that, they want us to tidy up the degraded environment at our own expense... Hold on! We do not represent the Soviet army that left this territory behind.
A reserve on a property means (at least for now) various restrictions on any activity (even logically necessary ones). For example, we cannot fence the territory. There is no fence, and the local residents (on the other side of the road) consider this territory to be accessible to everyone or even their own: they walk, cut Christmas trees, drill into birch trees in the spring for sap, walk their dogs, and we also feel some opposition from our next-door neighbours. How? Someone is going to build on “our” clearing???! Yes, those who managed to build their houses do not understand those who were “not allowed to manage in time”! People drive through our land on quad bikes and in jeeps, and construction waste was dumped on the property I represent. The police arrived quite quickly: “Owner! Clear it away or there will be a fine!” Of course, I cleared it away; it's a good thing there wasn't too much of it. I went to talk about this issue with a representative of the local municipal police. I must say: I felt and saw that the police are on the side of the “current locals”, with whom they do not want to conflict in any way. Speaking about the dumped construction waste, I concluded that it is allowed in the municipality, because the territory must be monitored by the owner, who, it seems, is himself to blame for the situation created by others. That is also absurd – they do not allow us to live on the property, but it has to be monitored almost every day!
Does the European roller like construction waste?
Yes, it is discussed and we are told that there are many things the European roller doesn't like! However, the local residents say something else: the European roller has been present, walked, and foraged in almost every yard.
Ornithologist E. Račinskis has worked with European rollers for many years – that would be clear. But!!!! In the matter of the European roller, the VKB and DAP rely only on his opinion, which is not right, because it would be good to hear the opinion of someone else, not directly the European roller researcher**. For example, how is the European roller doing elsewhere?
What is to be expected next?
The nature conservation plan for the reserve has been developed and submitted to the VARAM. As the DAP representative Gita Strode mentioned to me in a phone conversation, the first edition of the plan will be ready in May. We, the landowners, must be very careful, must keep studying it, and must keep our hand constantly on the pulse, because if we don't notice something in time, there will be no turning back! As soon as this plan is submitted for approval to the Cabinet of Ministers, that's it – finished!
What is happening in the reserve at the moment, what is being done?
... It is a reserve that has a defined territory, in which there are a number of private properties and in which no supervision or research is taking place. Everyone does what they want, except for the landowners, who are forbidden from doing so.
As I know, read, and hear, quite a lot of money is received from various funds and sources for various reserves and their creation projects. We do not feel it for a moment, because we – the owners – are the ones whom these reserves affect most directly, but the money, which should also most directly belong to us, is purposefully bypassing us. For example, the removal of construction waste from the area could be organized using money from some project, instead of trying to do it at the owners' expense.
By the way, we offered to have our properties bought back from us at market price. Please! In response: wide eyes and astonishment. “At market price? No, no! What are you saying! At the cadastral value!” The cadastral value for the properties is laughable – the land tax for the nearly 5 ha is 90 euros per year. So! In Garkalne Municipality, the minimum land price is 10 euros/m2. If we calculate the price for 5 ha...
It must be added that in the initial years, when the reserve was designated and the tax policy applicable to such territories was not reviewed, we (the 25 owners) paid quite a lot in tax for an effectively unusable area – that too!
Is it known what the plans of the 25 owners are?
Most people plan to live on their properties themselves. There are people who own other properties, they might think differently. It is normal to sell one property and invest the money received into another.
Recently, in the territory we are talking about, a peculiar exception appeared (see the sketch***); in the reserve at a bend in the road, one owner has been given permission to build. As can be seen, in nature there is a straight line (the road), which has suddenly turned into a broken line. I must say, when money appears, other interests fade. The European roller? ...
When might there realistically be an opportunity to build the intended houses?
When the aforementioned protection plan is adopted, which (hopefully) will include permission to build, and when the municipal binding regulations are in place. I must say, the attitude of the local government is also important, because it is not said that we will be allowed to build. The Garkalne Municipal Council can decide in various ways, and reasons to deny anything in Latvia can always be found. Or - reasons can be found to delay anything.
There was a case: our neighbors across the road decided to hire a tractor driver who brought concrete sleepers, which they placed on the roads driven on by quad bikes and jeeps – blocking or slowing down the continued driving through the forest. Shortly after that, the working group had a meeting in the field – DAP, ornithologists, a municipal deputy, and us. In the discussion, we mentioned these sleepers, which are effectively illegally (without our coordination) located on someone else's property. The tractor and tractor driver were filmed in action. As soon as we said that we knew the person... Silence! There is a feeling that we are partly considered “strangers” or even enemies. Enemies who do not attack!
Are the further plans of the DAP and VARAM known?
Presumably, none! Tidying up the territory is on our shoulders. They will allow us to do something about it ourselves. One must think they will allow it!
* For the beginning of the story, please read:
https://www.zemeunvalsts.lv/emigracijas-iemesls-zala-varna-
https://www.zemeunvalsts.lv/liegumu-izveidosanai-lidzekli-ir-kompensacijam-nav-un-nebus-
https://www.zemeunvalsts.lv/zala-varna-un-citas-retas-sugas-pieriga-dabas-aizsardzibas-specialistu-viedoklis
**https://www.daba.gov.lv/lv/ekspertu-registrs
*** The hand-drawn sketch shows an exception that recently appeared in the properties mentioned in the article (marked with thicker lines)