unsaveSave
expand-left
full screen Simpler processes for felling forests is one of the proposals in the Forestry Investigation’s partial report. Photo: Fredrik Sandberg/TT
Faster decisions and fewer appeals for those who want to cut down forests and a new system for compensation to landowners. These are some of the proposals from the investigator in the debated forest investigation.
Proposals that worry WWF – but are welcomed by LRF.
Before the partial report “Clear rules for active forestry” is handed over to Rural Affairs Minister Peter Kullgren (KD) on Thursday, the investigator has presented some of his proposals for the DN debate.
One proposal is to shorten the time between the notification that forest owners must make to the Forestry Agency before felling a forest and the time when felling can begin – from today’s six weeks to ten days.
The investigator Göran Örlander also suggests that it should not be possible to appeal against reports of logging that the Norwegian Forestry Agency does not act on.
– That environmental organizations should not be able to appeal “non-decisions” when the Norwegian Forestry Agency does not make a decision due to omission or lack of resources is unacceptable, says Peter Roberntz, forest expert at WWF.
– This together with the shortened time between notification and permitted felling means an increased risk that biologically valuable forest will be felled, he says.
“A Dead Hand”
LRF’s confederation chairman Palle Borgström, on the other hand, welcomes the proposals.
– We think that the investigators have the right intentions to simplify, clarify and create more legal certainty for the forest owners. Today, it is difficult to predict in advance how the courts will judge, and in the worst case it puts a dead hand on the forest owners, says Borgström.
Landowners are also proposed to receive compensation when it is not possible to use the forest because nature must be protected. It must amount to the equivalent of 125 percent of the market value in money.
– Even today, forest owners can receive compensation for not felling forests of high natural value, but there is a lack of money. This is a signal to the government to strengthen funding. But if the government doesn’t do it, it will be a blow in the air, says WWF’s Peter Roberntz.
Would like to see higher compensation
Palle Borgström at LRF would have liked to see a higher remuneration.
– It is one thing if you sell your property on your own initiative, but here it is the case that the state or someone else comes and takes over and then you should also consider the development of the value. What five or ten years ago looked like a pretty good compensation with 125 percent of the market value is today, given the development that has been very bad.
The forest inquiry was appointed in February and must give its final report no later than August 31 next year.