Forestry Council Discusses Amendments to Forest Act and Nature Conservation Act

TALLINN – Last week, the Forestry Council convened for the second time at the Ministry of Climate, for the first time under the leadership of Minister of Climate Erkki Keldo, to discuss amendments to the Forest Act and the Nature Conservation Act, the principles of sustainable forestry, and the initial research topics for the forestry scientific advisory board.

Keldo took over the leadership of the council from his predecessor Andres Sutt. "From now on, the work will proceed on two tracks. In the coming months, we will focus on legislative amendments that solve practical problems, clarify ambiguous requirements, and reduce the administrative burden. In the long term, we want to agree on the long- and short-term goals for forestry, as well as how to measure the progress towards sustainable forestry," Keldo said.

"We are not all going to think alike in forestry, and that is not the goal. We need to understand where we can move forward together, where we will disagree, and why," Keldo said. "The government and I are responsible for the decisions; the council helps to prepare them better. A talking shop leads nowhere. Therefore, we will move forward with amendments on which there is sufficient common ground and leave for future discussions those that would only lead to new confrontation today and thus require more substantive and lengthy debate."

Council members provided written feedback on the draft bills before the meeting. Based on this, the provisions were divided into three categories. The first includes those with broad agreement, which can be moved forward. The second group, provisions with major disagreements, will be excluded from the current package. The third group required substantive discussion.

A summary of the feedback was presented to the members in this form for the first time at the meeting. Therefore, members will have a chance to review it again, along with the draft bills that have been refined based on the feedback. The final list of provisions to be moved forward will be determined after that.

Four provisions were discussed in substance at the meeting. Regarding felling restrictions imposed by local governments, a proposal was made to move forward with an amendment requiring the municipality to either agree with the owner on acquiring the land or compensate for lost income. This would apply if a municipality prohibits regeneration felling in a mature or maturing forest outside a protected natural area. The principle of the amendment is that the entity imposing the restriction also bears its cost. However, it was emphasized in the discussion that the community must retain the ability to protect its living environment and that not all restrictions should automatically be subject to compensation.

For the ten-day waiting period on forest notifications, a proposal was made to abolish it for thinning, line-clearance cutting, and selection cutting. According to the original proposal, this would have also applied to design felling, but following the discussion, the waiting period will remain for design felling. The waiting period will also continue to apply to regeneration felling, deforestation for land conversion, and sanitation felling, as their impact on the natural environment can be greater.

There are no plans to proceed with two discussed amendments to the Nature Conservation Act in their current form. One amendment concerns voluntary nature conservation contracts on private land, modeled after the contracts for woodland key habitats. The principles of voluntary conservation received support in principle, but members' expectations regarding the duration, flexibility, and funding of such contracts differed.

A 99-year right of usufruct for protected forest land was also discussed. Several members felt that a new mechanism was not needed alongside the existing option of acquiring protected land, but rather that the current solution required better funding.

The issues of proportions and metrics for sustainable forestry will be addressed by the forestry scientific advisory board, which will convene for the first time in November and includes researchers from four universities. The Ministry proposes that the scientific advisory board assess whether and under what conditions a ratio between managed and protected forest land can be established, and address the questions of proportions and metrics for sustainable forestry. Secondly, it will determine which indicators should be used to measure progress towards sustainable forestry. The meeting showed that the 70/30 principle, which was paused in the spring, remains polarizing. According to several members, the long-term direction is more important than a single number.

In the second half of October, members will receive the meeting summary and the revised draft bills. This will allow them to clarify their positions or observations expressed at the meeting if necessary. The ministry is expected to publish the meeting summary and the list of provisions that will be moved forward in the first week of November. The Forestry Council will convene every one-and-a-half to two months. The next meeting will take place in December or January.