Norway’s ability to produce food is a national matter. That is why we have legislation and strict rules for when land and arable land can be demolished. The last few years of war, pandemic and uncertainty have shown how important self-sufficiency and food preparedness are. But our ability to produce food does not depend only on cultivated land. We are also heavily dependent on open field grazing, since only a small proportion of Norway’s land is actually suitable for cultivation. Why then do we build down important grazing areas in favor of cabins and recreational areas? Only a small part of Norway is suitable for cultivation. 7 percent to be exact. By comparison, almost half of Germany’s land can be cultivated. Norway therefore has a slightly different starting point for food production than many other countries. In fact, we are one of the countries in the world with the lowest proportion of fully cultivated land per inhabitant. This is the reason why we have instead used our mountains for grazing. We have a long tradition of releasing animals such as cows, sheep, reindeer, horses and goats into the countryside. In this way, we could use a larger part of our land to produce food. In fact, 45 percent of Norway’s land is suitable for grazing. This is a significantly larger area than what can be cultivated. That says something about how important open field grazing and meat production are for our self-sufficiency. For some, 45 per cent grazing area may sound like a lot, but open-field grazing has varying quality. Only 11 percent of grazing land is classified as very good grazing. This is land with nutritious feed that makes the animals grow better and cows give more milk. Our good grazing areas have been created through several hundred years of intensive grazing. If we don’t let animals out on open range grazing, the areas will change, the grazing quality will decrease and the cultural landscape will change. And Norway’s ability to produce food is reduced. If we compare mapped pasture quality with where cabins are built, we see that the cabin areas are most often placed in the same place as areas with very good pasture. We are therefore building down the area we badly need for food production with cabins, roads and associated service functions. The farmers, on the other hand, point out that it is not the actual downsizing of the grazing areas that is the biggest problem with cottage development. Because in step with cabin development, traffic in the immediate area also increases. And increased use of open land leads to an increased burden on grazing animals and grazers. Rennebu, Midtre Gauldal, Orkland, Rindal and Oppdal municipalities had a report drawn up in 2021 on how domestic reindeer and livestock are disturbed by, among other things, human activity in grazing areas. In 2023, an additional report was prepared with a focus on grazing and grazing for sheep and cattle in the Oppdals and Rennebus parts of Trollheimen and Ilfjellet. The reports are based both on previous research and on the experiences of pasture users. The results coincide with experiences many pasture owners have with grazing animals in cottage development: several injured and killed animals linked to stray dogs, daily phone calls and inquiries, collisions with animals and incitement in comment fields. To mention something. If you think that the points above do not sound significant, I can assure you that the list is not exhaustive. The situation is serious for many farmers. Some compare the situation to having grazing animals in an area with predators. The burden has become so great that they can’t take it anymore. For many farmers, the construction of cabins has such serious consequences that they end their operations. Based on experience, some farmers also choose to only have animals in inland fields. In other words, the development of cottages means that many people choose not to use the rich resources that lie in our countryside. From a national perspective, it is recommended to densify cottage areas rather than expand them. Unfortunately, this strategy has little to say for the grazing industry, because it is the number of holiday home units and the use of the land that lead to the biggest burden on the farmer. Densification will make pain worse. We cannot escape the fact that cottage development has become a national matter. It has major consequences far beyond the municipal boundaries. It leads to significantly increased traffic on our main roads, it increases the need for energy, and it has consequences for biodiversity and greenhouse gas emissions, just to name a few. In addition, it leads to a reduced national ability to produce food, also in the future. Why then are there few politicians who clearly take a stand against cottage development? Could it be that politicians themselves have a high-standard cabin? Is there a lack of understanding of how important the pasture is? Or is it simply because it is too conflicted? Simple measures are required. For example, a change in the Land Act, or a new state planning guideline. We must recognize that the municipalities themselves have no incentive to stop the development of the cottage areas, unless the local population shouts loudly enough. Municipal politicians are not necessarily elected to think beyond their own municipal boundaries. That is why we have legislation and national guidelines. Except when it concerns important grazing land.
ttn-69
Cabin in the food dish – Expression
