Train strike in Great Britain – the largest in 30 years

In climate action, trust is often placed in two points: technology and the forest.

pressed out? Jungle bath! Socially isolating during a pandemic? Walk in the woods with Kitchen Storm! Carbon dioxide emissions that will lead to famine and epidemics around the world? The forest can act as a carbon sink! Sixth mass extinction? The forest will fix it!

If all faith is to be placed in the forest, as a carbon sink and the last outpost of biodiversity, then it must remain so. Despite this, Swedish forest policy is not clear and full of loopholes faced by forest hooligans who destroy trees of high natural values.

Recently criticized The Norwegian Forest Agency’s forest policy is “unreasonably unclear” because forests worthy of protection must be preserved. At the same time, this must be done on a voluntary basis on the part of the owner. This opens the door to confusions about how to deal with protected forests.

Because what happens if the owner refuses to maintain forests with high natural values? Apparently none, at least if we look at the case about Jokkmokk in Norrbotten reported by Ekot (7/6). There, more than a thousand hectares of land of financier and forest hooligan Jonas Wallström were cut down, much more than is actually possible to obtain a permit. He solved this by dividing the forest into several companies, including Hvalfisken – an apt name given that 8 out of 13 whale species are considered threatened or vulnerable by the WWF.

The authorities were unable to stop the destruction, despite plans to turn the land into a nature reserve.

Behind fences that prevent inspection by the Swedish Forest Agency, the forest has been systematically cut down in what a forest biologist describes as “nature conservation vandalism,” including hundreds of years old pines. The authorities were unable to stop the destruction, despite plans to turn the land into a nature reserve.

Regulars can like this Trespassing goes unpunished? Yes, because even though the whole thing was reported as an environmental crime, it was outdated. While the hooligans break free and continue to ravage the land at will, it will take hundreds of years to restore the pine trees that he cut down.

When the criticism over the lack of clarity in forest policy was leveled by Rural Affairs Minister Peter Colgren, he told Eckott he wanted to see another investigation: “We can’t keep protecting more and more forests forever either. It’s not good for the economy or the climate” (7/6).

However, this is exactly what we must do. We must protect more and more forests, not only in the short term but also in the long term. This applies not only to the forest as a carbon sink, but also to biodiversity. Climate does not take into account who owns the land or whether or not it has fallen out of economic profit.

The forest debate is moving forward Ongoing biodiversity conservation and climate action against the right of forest owners to do whatever they want with their land. In the greatest crisis of our time, the government chooses to investigate again, rather than take responsibility and protect the forest.

June has just begun, but the temperatures and drought are eerily similar to what we saw in 2018. Fires are starting to become a daily feature in news reports and farmers are worried about the harvest. The climate crisis is here and it’s time to act. Why don’t you start with troublemakers in the woods?