The spectre is the EU Habitat Directive of 1992.The Directive provides that certain species of animals and plants, for example bats, shall be protected everywhere and not only in certain defined areas. Forest- and landowners will not be paid any compensation, because the EU considers it to constitute public subsidies that distort competition.
EU directive urges stop for new deciduous forests in Denmark-
An absurd and misfortunate situation is evolving in Denmark. Owners of deciduous forests will be imposed with restrictions, costs and work. For no compensation. And for no real reason.
Consequently, the forest owners are urged to plant conifers instead of deciduous trees. Contrary to everyone’s intentions.
How could things go that wrong?
The spectre is the EU Habitat Directive of 1992. That directive is the basis of Natura 2000-areas all over Europe. In Denmark forest- and landowners and public authorities are busy implementing the protection and conservation measures imposed by the directive. A good solution has been found; forest- and landowners are paid for protecting and managing their natural areas. Therefore they are motivated to create even more natural values in the future.
However, the Habitat Directive also provides that certain species of animals and plants, for example bats, shall be protected everywhere and not only in certain defined areas. Forest- and landowners will not be paid any compensation, because the EU considers it to constitute public subsidies that distort competition. Therefore the Danish Forest Act and the Nature Conservation Act are to be amended with restrictions on the exploitation of deciduous forests. No compensation, just confiscation.
There are absolutely no good aspects in this affair
The restrictions make no sense. The theoretical purpose is to protect 12 species of bats, but none of them is rare or threatened with extinction. They live and thrive everywhere in Danish deciduous forests.
The restrictions will cost forest owners money and work, as well as limit their freedom. Timber production will be lost. Forest management plans must be revised with new complications. And forest owners will be confronted with an increased and enduring administrative burden of reporting and applying before any felling in a deciduous forest.
The restrictions will destroy forest owners' confidence in the system. To avoid useless costs, more administration and loss of freedom, the forest owners will refrain from planting deciduous forest when then can choose conifers instead. Contrary to everyone’s wishes, to 20 years forest policy in Denmark and contrary to the considerations of the bats. An utterly absurd situation
In Denmark all parties involved agree that things have gone seriously wrong
The Danish Forest Association and the Danish Society for Nature Conservation have proposed another approach where the forest owners would be partners instead of opponents. This is clearly the most effective and sustainable approach to nature conservation, including the species that the Habitat Directive intends to protect.
In October the Ministry of the Environment and Minister Connie Hedegaard recognized the problem. But they see no getting round the directive.
The obvious long term solution is to have the 15 year old directive updated. It should be rewritten so as to motivate forest owners to conserve natural values, instead of circumventing them.
But in the short term Denmark will be compelled to amend its Forest Act and the Nature Conservation Act and all parties will suffer. Forest owners will be urged to cultivate coniferous trees instead of deciduous trees. Niels Reventlow and Jan Sondergaard
Danish Forest Association