Commentary by zemeunvalsts.lv
In the texts of Swedish organisations (even in translation), the same word combinations and sequences appear that are used by purveyors of similar information in Latvia. This is no surprise.
One is not really familiar with the matters of the sufficiently wealthy Sweden and the Swedish entertainment environment, because there is enough work to do in Latvia itself. One thing is certain: there is a government, and there are candidates for seats on the Riga City Council speaking about money and the need to spend it, which is good, because sitting on a pile of money and not giving any is unworthy even of politicians. But! Sweden, it seems, is worried about an ageing society, not about one or two million Swedes leaving to earn a living or live in other countries. This problem exists in Latvia. And our “asphalt-green” course supporters do not think about the economy and earning money, or think about it very little. Because, as one candidate for the Riga City Council put it: “Money? That's in the budget, isn't it!” I wonder why the energetic supporters of the “green deal” have not presented our government with a plan: “how to ensure that we spend more while earning less money.”
The second thing we see in Sweden and perceive as a similarity: talk about habitat quality or the situation, without mentioning their location, or who manages or supervises them, or... There is an unclear message that something is bad in some territories: why, for what reason... is not explained, yet there is clearly planned and directed action!
In Latvia, for the poor state of a habitat located in a protected area, for example in the Gauja National Park or the Grīņi Reserve, it is unlikely that just an imaginary forest owner, beekeeper or farmer will be responsible. So... The question is different and direct: who specifically is interested in the poor state of nature in Latvia or Sweden and the loud promotion of this poor state? Certainly not the owner or the manager, no! Who then?
(Translation from Swedish)
Introduction. The state of forest biodiversity is critical. In Sweden, we are failing to meet environmental targets. For this reason, a number of organisations have joined in a written appeal to the Swedish government, parliament and state authorities, demanding an immediate cessation of forestry operations in forests with significant natural values.
Climate and biodiversity are experiencing an international crisis. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) believe that catastrophic consequences are expected (or possible) in the future. Currently, 14 out of 15 forest habitats included in the EU Habitats Directive in Sweden have an unfavourable conservation status. Habitat loss is the main reason why more than 1,800 forest plant and animal species in Sweden today are on the Red List, i.e. are “near threatened or threatened”.
“We are concerned”
70 organisations from 25 countries and 30 scientists have joined in a written appeal to the Swedish government, parliament and state authorities, demanding an immediate cessation of forestry operations in forests with significant natural values throughout Sweden.
“We are concerned that forest logging is taking place in Sweden in forests with significant natural values or that forestry activities are being planned in them. We still have a significant portion of Europe's high-value north-western forests. These forests must be protected to preserve biodiversity and combat climate change.”
Intensive forestry
“Despite the critical situation, the Swedish Forest Agency has decided to stop registering ‘key’ habitats by December 2020 at the latest. A ‘key’ habitat is a forest plot that is essential for the existence of forest flora and fauna, and where Red List species grow or could grow. According to the FSC forest management certificate, forestry is completely prohibited in ‘key’ habitats.”
The Swedish Forest Agency recently published a report with several proposals for the intensification of forestry. These measures support increased logging, ditch clearing and a higher proportion of tree plantations, instead of preventing the decline of biodiversity and reducing greenhouse gas emissions.”
Losses must be reduced. By at least 50%
“It is 2020. According to international and national environmental goals, at least 17 to 20% of all land areas must be preserved as ecologically intact and continuous systems. The loss of natural habitats must be reduced by 50% and, if possible, stopped completely.”
Nowadays, only 6% of productive forest land is long-term protected in Sweden.
Time to act
The situation regarding biodiversity in forests is critical worldwide, and Sweden is no exception. We are not meeting our environmental targets. The potential for achieving these goals is reduced with every forest stand harvesting that takes place in forests with significant natural values.
To prevent the current depletion of forest areas, the situation requires that:
· “Key” habitats continue to be registered in connection with incoming reports on logging even after 2020.
· Forestry measures are immediately stopped in all forests with high natural value throughout Sweden. This would include registered and unregistered “key” habitats, baseline values and natural value objects. All contiguous forest areas and land areas with significant natural values must be carefully mapped, and if significant natural values are identified, they must be protected.
· Sveaskog is offered to change the directives binding on forest owners with reduced volumes of economic return from the forest, so that the environmental goal “for a living forest” can be achieved.
· Funding for forest protection is increased to 5 billion Swedish krona per year, starting from this term of office, until all forests with high natural values are protected with long-term, high-quality and transparent protection according to the recommendations of forest landscape specialists.
· Clear-cutting in forest stands is gradually phased out and replaced by continuous cover forestry in forests without high natural values.
The time has come to act more actively!
Julian Klein, Press Secretary, “Skydda skogen”
Isadora Wronski, acting head in Sweden, “Greenpeace”
Mikael Sundström, chairman, “Jordens vänner” and others...
Translation from: https://www.altinget.se/artikel/debatt-vaart-upprop-till-regeringen-dags-att-agera-mot-krisen-i-skogen
A photograph of a painting by Eduards Kalniņš has been used for illustration