The forestry industry itself registers the most important habitats for the forest’s vulnerable species. news has found that forestry has received close to NOK 200 million in government support to carry out the surveys. After news’s revelation “Everything is not in its greenest order”, four parties in the Storting will change the system. – We cannot leave it to those who depend on making money from the felling to check whether the forest is worth protecting. This must be one of history’s most glaring examples of a perverse incentive, says Kristoffer Robin Haug of the Green Party. Politicians from the Socialist Left Party, the Green Party, the Liberal Party and the Red Party all advocate surveys carried out by independent professionals. At the same time, the Conservative Party will ask the government for a review of the scheme. The FRP does not want to rush, but calls for better mapping and a “good and balanced” set of regulations. HOGSTMASKIN: Now several parties want new rules for the industry. Photo: André Fagernæs-Håker / news The forest news investigated news investigated a forest in Telemark, where it was planned to build a road to cut forest. The industry itself examined the forest in 2007 and found little nature that needed to be spared. The state administrator pointed to this 2007 survey and gave the thumbs up for road construction when people complained about the road being built. news therefore wanted to check the area again: The new check showed that the forest houses many more important habitats for species than what the industry had initially found. Three biologists who assessed the forest determined that the forest should be protected. AMAZING: – The difference between 2007 and the new surveys is amazingly large. We are talking about several hundred more acres that have been captured, noted news’s forestry expert, Terje Nordvik. TRANSLATED: In this forest, environmentalists believed that major environmental values had been overlooked. Photo: Reidar Gregersen / news Wants the goat and the sack of oats out of the forest – If what news has uncovered is the rule, it is highly reprehensible. A breach of trust, says Birgit Oline Kjerstad (SV). Kjerstad emphasizes that most forest owners want to use their forest in line with environmental requirements. She nevertheless adds: – We cannot live with an arrangement that is not complied with. It is very unfortunate if a power relationship and financial interests lead to pressure to underreport environmental values, says Kjerstad. Rødt highlights “the buck that fits the sack” as a fundamental system problem with all nature management. – We need to build our own environmental management, so that businesses of one kind or another – with their interests – do not get to set the guidelines, says Rødt’s Sofie Marhaug, second deputy chair of the energy and environment committee. – Then nature loses, she believes. Terje Halleland (Frp)Sofie Marhaug (Red)Kristoffer Robin Haug (MDG)Mathilde TybringGjedde (H)Ola Elvestuen (V)Birgit Oline Kjerstad (SV) Wants to stop support for forest car roads SV submitted before Christmas a representative proposal to chisel out a new, more sustainable forest law. Among other things, the party points out that they want industry-independent professional biological registrations of all forests older than 100 years. The proposal will be debated in the Storting in March. Red supports the proposal, but wants to go even further. They want the government to stop all financial support for felling in steep terrain and for forest roads in areas that have not previously been clear-cut. According to the party, this will be in line with the UN’s nature agreement which was adopted in Montreal last December. – Phasing out environmentally harmful subsidies is one of the easiest ways to stop the destruction of nature, Marhaug believes. Independent control Høyre believes the forestry industry is doing a lot of good to take care of endangered species and habitats. – But news’s findings show that there may be weaknesses in the way environmental values are mapped and registered in Norwegian forests today, says Høyre’s Mathilde Tybring-Gjedde, who sits on the energy and environment committee. She will ask the government to review the methods for registering and controlling important natural values. And consider new measures to ensure what is meant: To preserve the habitats of vulnerable species in the forests. MONITORING: Environmental registration should improve knowledge of biological diversity, and strengthen monitoring and management of environmental values. – There may be a need for an independent check of the environmental surveys, and better biological competence, she says. The Progress Party’s Terje Halleland thinks it is good that news is putting the spotlight on the system. He says the party is a supporter of efficient forestry. – But this must be balanced against important natural considerations, says Halleland. The FRP’s representative in the energy and environment committee calls for breadth – from landowners and business interests to research environments and nature organizations – in the design of a better set of regulations. – Judging from the article, it looks like there is potential for improvement. It is important that we look with prejudiced eyes at the legislation and the various schemes. Minister of State Sandra Borch: – Nothing about the forest sector’s environmental profile is close to critical Photo: JOHN-ANDRE SAMUELSEN / JOHN-ANDRE SAMUELSEN – Based on the findings news has made; What is the Minister of Agriculture’s comment on how the selection of natural values in the forest is carried out? – The environmental registrations are carried out according to an instruction based on research results on the connection between species and living environments, and the forest owners and their organizations choose which registered deposits are not to be logged. In this way, the forest owners have – so far – set aside around 1.2 million acres of forest – an area equivalent to around 170,000 football pitches – as key biotopes that are not to be felled. This is the demarcation of forests that the industry imposes on itself – and which entails a loss of income – without compensation from the public sector. The forest owners’ organizations also put significant resources into monitoring that these areas are managed as intended and handling any deviations. – Is the species diversity in the forest, which includes nearly half of all our red-listed species, sufficiently protected with current forestry legislation and management? – The overall management of nature in Norway must ensure protection and protection of natural values. At the same time, natural resources must be managed in a way where we achieve a good transition from black to green carbon and where we must ensure access to raw materials and local jobs and value creation. The most important laws in this overall management of forests are the Planning and Building Act, the Natural Diversity Act and the Forestry Act, and through them we have ambitions for both the protection of nature and the use of nature. Based on the considerations this balance requires – and when we see what our knowledge bases tell us; The national forest assessment, the Red List etc. – I would say that today we have good management of both use and conservation interests. But the administration and industry can of course always be improved. – Does the sum of laws and regulations provide sufficient protection for this part of our nature? – The national forest assessment shows that we get more forest, we get more old forest, we get more large and old trees, and we get more dead wood. We therefore see that important values for biological diversity are developing positively. In this sense, it is my assessment that we have a good balance. – Which specific points will the government improve? – It is always possible to make things better when it comes to environmental knowledge and environmental considerations. Follow-up is ongoing both with regard to the registration scheme, increased monitoring of key biotopes and strengthened requirements for competence of those who carry out the environmental registrations. In parallel, the forest industry has worked together with the environmental movement and others to improve and streamline the PEFC certification system. We therefore do not see that there is anything about the forest sector’s environmental profile that is critical or close to critical. Want more competence Mani Hussaini, parliamentary representative from Akershus, answers on behalf of the Labor Party: – After reading news’s cases, I think we need increased competence in the forestry industry when it comes to mapping the ecosystem in the forest. We also need fighting environmental crime to be a higher priority for the police. If the prosecuting authorities perceive laws and regulations that are supposed to take care of nature to be unclear, we obviously have a job to do in clarifying nature’s place in the legislation Points to weak legislation news has also turned the spotlight on the Forestry Act. In the case “Reports that disappeared in the forest”, news revealed that no one has been convicted of illegal logging under this law. The police stick their heads in the tree when they investigate possible environmental crime in the forest. Most cases are dropped. The police point to a woolly piece of legislation. Venstres Ola Elvestuen does the same. He points out that one of the regulations in the law refers to the PEFC standard, which the industry itself is leading in designing. – The regulation has no meaning and must be changed, believes the former climate and environment minister. Illegal harvesting of natural assets The forestry industry has shown that their own environmental rules, through the PEFC standard, are stricter than the legislation. news recently checked how strict the industry is with itself. It turns out that forestry breaks its own environmental rules time and time again. But they still retain the green certificate. GUARANTEED: The dictionary says it means: “Insure”. “Go good for.” Since 2015, four of the largest companies have told about almost 200 cases of wrongful felling: Especially important nature that should be left alone is felled. – If it is the case that no one loses their environmental certificate for serious breaches of the standard, the scheme is undermined, Ola Elvestuen believes. He wants to change legislation and regulations. – So that it is established that only approved, independent professionals can survey the natural values in the forests.
ttn-69
Wants an end to the forest industry itself mapping the environmental values in forests – news – Klima
