"These are the percentages we formulated in the cabinet, and on that basis we will shape Estonia's legal framework going forward. This provides long-awaited clarity for the forestry industry, which is an important sector, and signals the direction Estonia is taking," said Prime Minister Kristen Michal (Reform).

Michal added that if, over time, new species requiring environmental protection are discovered in certain forests, protection should be eased elsewhere to maintain the total volume of protected forest at 30 percent.

He emphasized that environmental protection is not being overlooked and expressed hope that clear rules for conservation and forest management — defining who can do what in the sector — will help ease tensions. "Good fences make good neighbors," the prime minister said.

Minister of Climate and Environment Andres Sutt (Reform) said amendments to the Forest Act will be drafted by fall.

"We also decided in government to set the general land-based protection target at 30 percent in the Nature Conservation Act. Protected forestland will make up one-third of that," Sutt said.

He added, "The Nature Conservation Act will also specify that 30 percent of the sea area will be under protection."

"I hope we can now begin to build trust moving forward. A middle path between nature and forestry is essential, and that's how we've shaped this proportion," the minister said.

The government also discussed a proposal from entrepreneurs to limit the spring nesting season restrictions solely to protected areas in the future.

"Regarding nesting season protections, our position remains that we will await the European Court's ruling. Until then, voluntary nesting season restrictions will continue in private forests and RMK forests will also maintain these protections," Sutt said.

Addressing forest management in limited management zones, Sutt stated that the government supports continuing the current system.

"Management activities may continue on a small scale with approval from the Environmental Board and on a case-by-case basis. We are abandoning the plan to impose a blanket ban on regeneration felling in these zones. Flexibility will be maintained to balance conservation and management goals. The Environmental Board will take a tailored approach," said Sutt.

On Thursday, the government's economic cabinet reviewed a proposal package submitted by the Estonian Forest and Wood Industries Association, which has also been approved by the government's advisory council of entrepreneurs. The proposals aim to increase investment certainty in the sector and boost economic competitiveness, while ensuring the preservation of environmental values.

ELF: Political demands to make it into the law

Among the proposals to reduce bureaucracy submitted to the government, several were actually political decisions, according to Tarmo Tüür, head of the Estonian Fund for Nature (ELF).

"One such decision, which the government supported today, is the move to fix in law that 70 percent of Estonia's forests be designated as managed forests. This is, in fact, a political demand — a talking point that the Estonian Forest and Wood Industries Association has been pushing for at least five years through various forestry development plans, articles and smaller proceedings. Now it's being framed as though it's about regulation or bureaucracy, which is very puzzling," Tüür said Thursday on Vikerraadio's "Reporteritund."

"Of course, this requires a legislative amendment, and that process is about to begin. But now we're in a situation where the government has already declared its position — driven the stake into the ground — and the question becomes: how and with what level of engagement should other stakeholders participate when the outcome already seems predetermined," he added.

"If political decisions are going to be made under the guise of reducing bureaucracy, then there should be a clear explanation of how conflicts of interest are being prevented and acknowledged in the entrepreneurs' advisory council — or this should at least be transparently communicated to the public. Especially if decisions are being made that align with the business interests of some council members," said Tüür.

"I haven't heard such explanations. But they should be given, to preserve the integrity of the idea of reducing bureaucracy," he added.

Eliisa Pass, a forest expert at the Estonian Fund for Nature, also said the government's decision is deeply concerning in both substance and form.

"Setting this kind of limit contradicts the core objective of the Nature Conservation Act, which is to protect Estonia's natural environment. The change ignores the actual size of habitats for rare species and also conflicts with the EU's Nature Directive. For instance, if new category-one protected species habitats are discovered in managed forests, existing protected areas would need to be reduced — this puts Estonia's natural values at risk overall. The decision deepens the divide between economic development and environmental protection," Pass told ERR.

"A second decision made today by the government allows clear-cutting — the most destructive form of logging — to continue in the limited management zones of protected areas. This proves that designating 30 percent of forest as protected does not ensure real protection. In practice, much of the supposedly protected forest will remain open to clear-cutting. Over the years, clear-cutting in limited management zones has stripped areas of Lahemaa National Park and conservation areas in Hiiumaa," Pass said.

She emphasized that the advisory Council on Effectiveness and Economic Growth, made up of entrepreneurs, was supposed to identify technical and bureaucratic barriers, but contrary to what was promised to the public, the council is now being used to make substantive political decisions.

"In this case, it's a decision that requires legislative change and has major implications for Estonia's natural environment. In a democratic country, such changes should be made with the full involvement of all stakeholder groups and based on thorough impact assessments. What we saw today is that the government has locked in its position, indicating there is no intention of meaningfully involving other stakeholders," Pass added.

--

Follow ERR News on Facebook and Twitter and never miss an update!