What does the forest industry and politicians mean by “sustainable use”

I’m mainly involved in the preservation of our last real forests, ie continuity forests which have been used but never been clear cut in the past. They are the last remains of true forests with rich diversity of plants and animals and trees of all ages from small plants to pine trees hundreds of years old. We can almost forget primeval forests because there are only small fragments left in this country, but continuity forests are very important to preserve for the future. The big problem is that the forest industry that need a never-ending stream of raw material to their plants lacks raw material, ie forest. The plantations that began in the late 50’s and which have escalated since then are not really mature to be harvested yet and then they look at the last “real” forests we have left. They will stop at nothing to get over this land and the propaganda machine is in full swing.

In the virtually allotious use of clear cutting, one begins with a clear cut land that causes most of the life to dry out or flush and die. Then gradually rows of similar tree trees of the same kind grow up. The plantation also becomes much denser than a natural forest, and in the end, it all start over again when the forest is between 70 and 100 years. The difference to a natural forest is huge, a spruce can be 200-250 years, pines can be hundreds of years old and when they die they last for hundreds of years and become home for birds and other species. After that, they can lie on the ground and give life for other species for another several hundred years. The forest industry is marketing the importance of forestry to save the climate when the best thing for the climate actually is to let the forest stand and grow old. They talk about the sustainable forestry of Sweden while lurking for the last real forests. The only sustainable thing about this is the forest industry’s economy. The forest industry is completely dependent on a never-ending flow of raw materials and they are afraid of the least disturbance of this flow.

Then, the forest industry give the impression that we who want to save the little that’s left are threatening the entire forestry, countryside and jobs. What we want is to save about 20% of an average of our production forests for the future. Thus 80% can be used, but hopefully with a little more careful methods than they use now. Is that too much to ask for.

This is how it looks…




Some preserved traces…



RIP. This view does not exist anymore due to a clear cut a couple of years ago..



About Per

Working with Business Intelligence at Capgemini. All other time is devoted to photography with main focus on nature- wildlife and cultural activities.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s