The so-called “nature census” is slowly approaching its finish line (the launch of the 4th season was announced on 8 April). Its potential consequences are neither foreseeable nor predictable. The potential impact of this project on the lives of people in rural Latvia and their ability to continue managing their land is currently impossible to determine. The authors, organisers and participants of the project also deliberately avoid predicting or commenting on this.

Several years ago, when the necessity for an inventory of natural values was only just being discussed in Latvia, one of the most significant arguments put forward was: “no one knows what we have on our land!” Truly a land and state of the ignorant, because many do not know something...

To put an end to this ignorance, “respectable” round sums were allocated to the nature inventory. Moreover, when starting this process, no one, unfortunately, answered or wished to answer: what we will do or what will be done once the natural values have been inventoried. Yes, a few not-too-loud voices demanded a clear answer! Instead, the response was: “First let’s count, then we will decide…” The owners of some of these voices (those wanting answers) did grumble and predict that the initially harmless and peaceful “nature census” project would turn into yet another initiative to initiate restrictions against owners of forests and agricultural land. In turn, the “nature counters” and “friends of nature” harshly shamed these “blockheads” and “ignoramuses” at every turn. As time passes, the zero hour is slowly approaching – the moment when the “nature counters” will “serve up their work on a platter”! The first interesting signals of what the work done so far might mean have already appeared. Recently, the owner of a small piece of land and a house received a letter from the authority commanding the “nature counters”. The letter contained the news that in the house’s courtyard, which had been dug up several years ago for renovation work, a nature counter had found a rarity of European scale. The letter asked if the “excavations” from the renovation work were still “intact, sound, and untouched”. The owner stared, stunned, at the diggings in their courtyard and could not understand whether to rejoice or cry. Such a miracle – a natural value in the pits of a dug-up courtyard – is worth a sensation in itself, only does this mean that the owner and their family can no longer cross the dug-up courtyard, not to mention levelling the excavations or sowing and mowing the lawn? The recipient of the letter shared their thoughts with a local luminary, who, recalling the war years, suggested: “Level the courtyard, otherwise you will become a prisoner on your own property, you won’t be able to do this or that, and you won’t be able to sell it to anyone either, because who needs a hut in the countryside with a dug-up courtyard inhabited by some European rarity whose peace no one must disturb!” In turn, the younger generation suggested the exact opposite, as in their view, crowds of tourists would flock to this remote corner from Europe, and one would only have to collect money for entry and access to the property. However, this scenario would require the owner to be able to find this natural rarity in the dug-up courtyard pits themselves, see it with their own eyes, and show it to all interested parties with a flourish! But, what bad luck! The “nature counter” could not be persuaded in any way (even by trying various stimulants and motivators) to come and show the owner what this European-scale natural miracle was! The justification for the refusal read: “I don’t have to show anything, everything is duly recorded and that’s that!” The “nature counter’s” refusal disappointed the author of the tourism dream palace already painted in such vivid colours in their mind, and they decided to photograph and record video of all the excavations and puddles. For a small but fair fee, a person with a biology degree was asked to take a look and identify which the important plant or formation was. The biologist’s answer was implacable: “There’s plenty of this stuff all around the area, but whether any of the things growing here are a rarity across Europe, they have no idea!” Our state – Latvia – is like a place of obvious, albeit at first glance unbelievable, miracles, because elsewhere, especially in developed countries, such natural miracles (which are at every step in Latvia) have become a rarity, but the question is: should those who live alongside them suffer for it, or those who no longer have them?

The question: “What will Latvia do with the data obtained by the ‘nature counters’?” remains open. Let us not be naive – having spent millions and seeing “unique” European-scale natural values, they will certainly not leave them under the control of the landowner to do whatever they want. That will certainly not be the case! How will it be? The next two years will show! In this matter, one must take into account the “Green Deal” proclaimed by Europe, complete with all kinds of “greening” – in taxes, transport, agriculture, and people’s habits. In this context, it is unlikely that the Latvian government, whatever it may be and whichever political forces form it, will be able to say: “Many thanks for the discovered European values, but we will not impose any additional protected areas or special conditions on the owner of the dug-up courtyard!” “Friends of nature” right here locally, and even more so in Europe and the world, will not understand such a position by Latvia; and that already means that at least part (if not nearly all) of the newly discovered natural values will have to be protected from the potential actions of “all sorts of smallholders”. The most likely scenario: “friends of nature” will beat the drums in rhythm with the government and report on the “achieved” results, for the “consolidation” of which appropriate “decisions” will be needed. Since at the end of the last century and the beginning of this century, Latvian nature regained what had been taken away from it by humans several hundred years ago, let us not be surprised if the whole of Latvia were declared a European-scale “rarity”, where, for the purpose of preserving European natural values, bans and restrictions are to be set almost across the entire territory. The risk that the people still living in the countryside could threaten natural values will force those sitting in Riga’s institutions to look for solutions – to set draconian fines, so to speak, so that no one’s hands get itchy, perhaps also to offer a small but fair compensation for “doing nothing”, or perhaps still to “help” these people to head to Latvia’s major cities, or better yet to those European countries where there are fewer natural values but still work and higher wages are paid. Only… Who will maintain the state we call Latvia in such a case? If the result of the “nature census” is similar to what was described above, it will be pathetic! Will the predictions of the bad “prophets” really come true, that landowners might have to at least “break a sweat”, if not suffer significantly, due to the work of the nature inventory takers? That is what some people were “bellowing” about even before the start of the nature census, who, as mentioned in the introduction, were declared blockheads and people lagging behind real life.

* Identifying the distribution and quality of specifically protected habitats of European Union importance