An independent observer of the Forest Stewartship Council

Another formal complaint against SCA's clearcuts in Sweden - this one from Greenpeace Nordic and SSNCTags: Sweden, Complaints procedures, High Conservation Value Forests, Greenpeace, SGS Qualifor

The Swedish Society for Nature Conservation (SSNC) and Greenpeace Nordic recently filed a formal complaint with FSC about the logging operations of SCA in northern Sweden. SSNC and Greenpeace Nordic's press release is posted below. The organisations are demanding that SCA's certificate be withdrawn.

These photographs were taken of SCA's logging operations at Ratnivaara, where SCA has already logged 30 hectares of high conservation value forest and is planning to clearcut a further 50 hectares (click on the photographs for larger versions - photos © Olli Manninen):

The following photographs were taken at Norrmyrberget, where SCA has clearcut 28 hectares of mixed coniferous and deciduous forest. In the logged area, SSNC and Greenpeace found the remains of 7 red-listed species and other indications that the forest had been of high conservation value (click on the photographs for larger versions):

While these images are shocking enough in themselves, what's worse is that this is not the first formal complaint against SCA's destructive logging operations in northern Sweden. In November 2007, SSNC filed a formal complaint against SCA's clearcuts at Mellanbergsmyrorna. In a press release issued shortly after the complaint, Jerker Karlsson, President of SCA Skog acknowledged that there was a problem: "We have received well-grounded criticism for inadequate nature conservation. In these incidences, we have not maintained the standards we have set and our instructions have not been followed. This is unacceptable and we are now taking actions to avoid any repetition."

In February 2008, the certifying body, SGS Qualifor, carried out an audit of SCA and decided that despite the problems, SCA could retain its FSC certificate. After SGS Qualifor's audit, Karlsson announced that SCA "will ensure that we have a high and uniform level of quality in terms of nature conservation in our forestry operations and that we fulfill the commitments we have made."

SGS Qualifor is responsible for monitoring whether SCA complies with FSC's standards. Certifying bodies are not supposed to issue certificates based on hoped for improvements at some point in the future. SSNC and Greenpeace's monitoring of SCA, which seems to be considerably more thorough than that of SGS Qualifor, reveals that SCA's operations still do not comply with FSC's Principles and Criteria. It also reveals the hopeless inadequacy of the FSC complaints system - when a company can continue its destructive logging even after a formal complaint has been made.

New formal complaints filed to FSC: environmental organizations think SCA should loose its certificate

The Swedish Society for Nature Conservation (SSNC) and Greenpeace Nordic have filed a joint formal complaint against SCA regarding two clear-cut loggings in northernmost Sweden. The environmental organizations have listed more than one hundred violations of the FSC standard and have noted a large number of findings of red-listed species in each of the two sites.

At Ratnivaara, about 30 kilometers south of Gällivare and in Norrmyrberget, 12 kilometers south-west from Vuollerim Greenpeace activists have revealed a large number of violations against the environmental rules of the FSC-standard that SCA has promised to comply with.

"This is another example of the insufficiency of SCA's routines and knowledge. We think that the company should loose its certificate for FSC-labeling to fundamentally change its attitude and knowledge," says Mikael Karlsson, chair of the SSNC.

At Ratnivaara there is an area of about 80 hectares ancient pine forest of which 33 hectares have been logged so far and the rest is marked for logging. At Norrmyrberget in the municipality if Jokkmokk, SCA has logged 28 hectares of natural mixed coniferous and deciduous forest with abundance of dead wood.

In the formal complaint to the FSC certifying organization the SSNC and Greenpeace Nordic criticize:

  • Natural forests of considerable age and high protection value have been clear-cut. Nature values have been destroyed for ever.

  • A large number of findings of remnants of red-listed species have been made in the clear-cut areas. Special consideration to such species should be taken according to FSC. 39 findings of red-listed species were made in Ratnivaara and 29 in Norrmyrberget.

  • Special consideration has not been taken to small habitats with special biodiversity values.

  • High biodiversity trees have been logged.

  • Dead trees that are important for biodiversity have been run over and damaged by harvesters.

SCA is already involved in a process where the company's certificate for FSC-labeling is reviewed. This review was finished last Friday, just after SSNC's and Greenpeace's filed their formal complaint. The certifying organization is requested to take the new information into account.

"Altogether the violations to the FSC-standard found here are very serious, it is remarkable that a company that is being reviewed for several violations to the FSC-standard during the passed year can't avoid new wrongs," says Mirjam Lööf forest campaigner at the SSNC.

"What we saw at Ratnivaara was a forest that should have been protected for the future. That a company can sell wood from this forest and claim that as certified is cheating the companies and consumers who trust the labeling," says Amanda Tas forest campaigner at Greenpeace Nordic.

More photos from SCA's logging at Ratnivaara are available by clicking here.

More photos from SCA's logging at Norrmyrberget are available by clicking here.


I'm glad to see that Greenpeace has challenged this certificate. But when are they going to issue complaints against all the other fraudulent FSC certificates?

this company has to be closed alltogether and made by law to replant all forrests they destroyed!!!!

No worries nurith.

Swedish law stipulates already today that renegeration has to take place after harvesting. Either in form of planting new trees, or natural regeneration (leaving seed trees).

In fact, Sweden has never had so much forests in modern time as today. Just 100 years ago, many places around the industrial areas in the south and in the central parts were completely clear from trees. Today it's full of dense forests.

So save your exclamation marks for something relevant instead.

just i am visiting Sweden and see all this hugh clearcuts again, maybe FSC certificate or not, equal! Its a shame in the "middle" of europe see something like this....

Dear insider or XYZ or whatelse,

seems that You totally misunderstand or do not want to understand the situation. sorry, but please read Your own comment again; and thinking about this words, please.

FSC is running in Germany and Europa as a garant for sustainable and environmentally friendly forestry. So all companies how really try to make something better then FSC (what is really very easy)are tricked (like me for example(I never will deliver one peace of FSC certificated wood; before i will hang me and my job up.))
Here the situation is very clear, that exactly this (sustainable and legal woodproduction(these clearcuts are not legal per Swedish and European law....!)cannot be guaranty by FSC. Its absolutely equal if Sweden have 100 Years before less or more forests. This is absolutely not the question. This nobody interest in the discussion on the fraud and criminal system of FSC! As long as the discussion is on this level, FSC can say that it protect Ancient forest, store carbon buy using the forest, as meanwhile clearcut it and plant Palmoil...So long all what is FSC certificated in the European (and maybe other regions as well) law!!! is "legal cut and sustainable produced" its a fraud to the people what made few arrogant and noing all better NGO like WWF and Greenpeace with supporting FSC. I am totally pissed off, not that clearcut in boreal and tropical forest don't stop. but that these NGO destroy there rest of habilitation with supporting these companies which practice these forestmanagement.
So let FSC cut the last forest and destroy there the living possibilities of the human race, seem that no other way will learn the Homo SAPIENS!(maybe better to call this race Homo DESTRUCTIVE) to protect themselves.
Sorry for my engsh and my diction, but i am sitting in a car with a very little netbook in stockholm just leaving a hugh clearcut session, my fingers are too big for the keybord.....

As a comment to your last paragraph I definitely agree with you! Stockholm, just like every European urban area, is a large "clearcut session". And I would not be surprised if you live in one of these "clearcut sessions" yourself and are rather happy about it.

Concerning your other comments I find them rather erratic (the "palmoil" comment in a Swedish context for example), not worth replying to really, but since I am an understanding & kind individual I will still give you some input:

First of all, your reasoning is the typical "eating-the-cake-and-still-keep-it approach". If you want to utilise wood fibre you need to cut/harvest it. Period. In order to do it in a sustainable way you have to make sure you will always have a stable stock to harvest from, meaning that every cut tree (& more, due to natural losses in the cycle) has to be replaced/replanted.

Swedish forest land & standing volume in terms of hectares and m3 has steadily grown over the past century, despite increased harvesting volumes. This is easy to verify by, e.g. looking at statistics from the Swedish Forest Agency (svo.se). Forest inventories have been made regurlarly since the 1920s. Since 1920, standing wood volume has almost doubled!

This impressive recovery of forest land is all thanks to responsible forestry, that started to take place in the 1920s with continuos improvement until today, and thanks to people in the industry who in fact love their job and love the nature and its opportunities, let it be harvest of wood, berries, wild game or other forest products that can be harvested sustainably, or just leisure & outdoor activities.

So much for your comments on "sustainability", which you seemingly imply would not be the case in Sweden(?). I do hope you know what the word means?

As regards "clearcut". You can choose to harvest wood in different ways. Clearcut is one way and probably the best one as we know today for Nordic forestry. Another method is selective cutting which isn't always the best alternative for us since it tends to deplete the standing volume over time. Not too "sustainable" in other words... It is also rather harsh to the ground since machines have to go in on the site more frequently.

Average clearcut size in Sweden has dramatically been reduced over the past 40 years in forestry and today it is about 5-8 hectares in the south and maybe 15-20 ha in the north. In the 1970s it could be hundreds of hectares on one single site. A dramatic improvement in other words! Clearcut is a perfectly legal method according to Swedish forestry legislation so your comment about illegality is complete nonsense!

FSC may not be the perfect system but I believe it's the best one we have today as its 10 principles cover most aspects of forests and related activities. I also think wood fibre is one of the best raw materials we can utilise since it is renewable. On the contrary to fossile fuels for example. Of course, this system needs to be monitored and constantly improved. But ideally through input based on facts and balanced argumentation, rather than emotional "blablabla" and sometimes seemingly, shady & hidden agendas.

Finally, Swedish, or Scandinavian, people, in comparison with people living on the continent, are extremely bound to nature and do know how to enjoy and responsibly utilise and take care of forests/nature in form of outdoor life; fishing, hunting, berry- and mushroom picking, or more modern activities like hiking, sports, skiing, skating, kayaking, sailing. You name it. This we have done over the centuries and we will continue to do so. By the way, not too seldom we see summer tourists coming in their fancy BMWs & Mercedes, littering wherever they go!

Therefore it's rather insulting to see these "besserwisser" comments from people, many coming from the "clearcut sessions" on the continent, trying to teach us how to deal with our habitat. Mind your own business first. You can start with the open pit coal mines in Germany!

I do start to understand the Innuites and why they got "pissed off" (speaking of "pissed off"...) by Brigitte Bardot's urban campaigns against them and their livelihood.

Insider said:

'your reasoning is the typical "eating-the-cake-and-still-keep-it approach". If you want to utilise wood fibre you need to cut/harvest it. Period...

...FSC may not be the perfect system but I believe it's the best one we have today as its 10 principles cover most aspects of forests and related activities. I also think wood fibre is one of the best raw materials we can utilise since it is renewable.'

Well said, Insider.

However I fear you are casting your pearls before swine. Reasoned defence of modern sustainable commercial forest management cuts little ice with many of the readers of this website.

But please keep it up!



Dear Insider,
First of all, I visited Stockholm just now as a tourist, but I was before in Dalarna and Värmland as well, So don’t keep on this detail! What shall say me this message? I am Shaking my head…..
Buy the way: Stockholm is not a Clear-cut area, again You have misunderstand and don’t know anything about ecosystems (urbans as well), Please investigate a little about the history of Stockholm since “Hansetime”….But here I don’t waste any more time on this theme.
So I read Your comment and ask You seriously: IN case of management of boreal forest We shall believe that:
a) it’s the best ecological way to totally evacuate the biomass from the cutted area only let in free sun the unrotten needles and mosses?
b) Its legal to cut areas of more then 50 hektar?
c) That is “sustainable” to work like in the agriculture and let a fauna and flora desert behind?
d) It’s the best idea to PLANT new trees from other genetic source, maybe from a totally other landscape thousand of kilometres away?
e) That teh system of seedtrees are really working and not only a Potemkin’s village?
f) To plant trees, all the same genetic code, species what are not naturally there (Pinus radiate is only one example), all the same age, growing all the same high is about natural and produce a stabil forest?
g) That’s this “ageclassforest”(sorry, maybe bad translation) is ecological acceptable?
h) That the use of chemistry (NPK) and pesticides, what is necessary in this system is good for flora and Fauna and humans as well?
i) That you don’t have erosions Problems in clear-cut areas with flushing hugh quantities of half decayed humus (very acesent needles)?
j) That a per Humans replants genetic desert have the sam value then a natural forest?
k) That you don’t have extraordinary fire problems what are totally other then natural fires?
l) That at least the only way is Clear-cut to have a ecologic sustainable Forestmanagment in Boreal forest?
m) That, for its FSC accepted, must be good?
n) That’s acceptable to clear-cut an area of minimum 500 hectares?
o) That the mammon’s which life in this area just go away and search just beside another forest to life there without any problems?
p) That the management of the Wood business companies, which are normally business economist have themselves any idea of Forestmanagment or an higher Interest to protect the forest logtime then to take out as much profit as possible?
q) To spend hugh cost to develop another more sustainable (When You believe, that’s this is possible) forestmanagmentsystem when this system, what is for them efficient is “accepted” for they love there forest?
r) That the management let certificate there forest as PEFC or FSC only for they love there forest and want to protect him?
s) That the Swedish law is a really forest protection law and not build up in centuries where the Wood and the steel are the strongest industries in the country? And these industries don’t have any Lobbyism long time ago to protect there Interest?
t) ………that there is no other, more respectful and environmental friendly way to take out wood from the forest, then good night……

Ok, then dream furthermore in Your mare, for me it’s a nightmare that someone believe this in these times. Do You ever have one though about our chide, what dead system we will bequeath them: CAn You reaaly look into there eyes in 30 Years?

MAYbe You can believe, that there are others how now something about Swedish law (like the swedish public prosecutor??? or is he only same stupid as all other people in Your mind…..
I can only replay: Please read from neutral place what You write a scientific nonsense.
When i read Your comment i can only believe, that Your are a lobby from the woodindustry trying to impose Your mind over the people without reference to losses….
I get very angry, when i read this nonesense. What are You babbling here.
Please read also my comment from the day before, that I don’t have to repeat myself what I am and what I do. IN a more conflict matter business I cannot be like I am.

Other to Your comment:

“Swedish forest land & standing….”
This, several studies show, is only the 20% off the truth. What it take fort he forest a matter when the standing wood is doubled since the 1920
Since then, the Systematic of Counting the standing Wood have changed several time, oh sorry, coincidentally always to have more standing wood then before. And is the standing wood the straightedge of sustainability?

“This impressive recovery of forest land is all thanks…..”
Responsible Forest????? Where You live from what You speak? Your living in the Antarctic? I can show you a lot of Picture from Your “responsible” Forestmanagment (Stora Enso/ bergvik and all! Others) all over sweden 200 m far away always from the touristic road, the Forestmanagment shame themselfes…..

As regards "clearcut".
Come to the 21 century, to a science, what is not paid from the sawmills please. I have read a lot of this bullshit, but I am sure, that these is discussed in this forum and I don’t have to repeat, when Not, maybe the administrator of FSC watch can give me a sign.

“FSC may not be the perfect system….”
FSC is the best System, sure, I give You 1000% right.
But I am so sorry, not for the forest. For the lovely, fraudulent woodbusinessindustry (I am a part of it!)
Its exactly this fraud, criminal lying, suckering, ripping off, ignorant, without scientific background system, FSC is really responsible for the pocket of there operators, Yes I can always repeat this.
FSC is responsible of
Let clear-cut 70 Mio Hectare boreal forest.
Let using hard Chemistry and pestizids
Destroying human rights and ethnin people
….. without an end

„Finally, Swedish, or Scandinavian, people….”
This is right, but a normal citizen have only „Aftonbladet“ and other newspapers, they cannot proof like on other places too, what the industry say, maybe You want to tell me, that Sweden is responsible in using energy as well????

“Therefore it's rather insulting….”
When i see problem, with carbon mines or clear cuts I discuss this, sure, Germany have a lot of problem too and i fight on this since the 12 of December 1972. But You really want to tell me, that for we have problems too, we are not allowed to criticize another country. So we must let the people in Myanmar and china in there own shit for we have open Cool mines. Ok….
Only little Pointe: I lived about 1,5 Year In a forest, without any electric energy, without a heating system, only a very little oven, the next possibility to buy something 7 km far away….

“I do start to understand the Innuites…”
O these line, Yes, we can agree! Wow…..
This all ignorany and arrogancy make me really very angry andd therefore i stop now, otherwise i will ask how is the ecoswine.....

My goodness, I have seldom seen so much ignorance over a topic!! Still I would like to reply to your comments:

a) no, and it does not exist in Swedish forestry either

b) the forest regulation, amongst others, stipulates a maximum share of younger forests for the same management unit (legal ownership).

c) I don't know where you get "agriculture" from. Parts of former agriculture land has indeed been planted simply because agriculture is not an option in some areas anymore. The majority of the poulation used to be farmers before, about 100 years ago. Today it's better to grow trees on these areas than weed & bushes...

d) I'll tell you something scary. Norwegian Spruce, Picea Abies, is an immigrant in our country. After the last ice age it came from the northeast via Finland and spread south over the country. Do you dislike human immigrants too?

e) it works very well (I've seen densities of 25,000+ plants/ha in some areas) on suitable sites, but regeneration method always has to be site adapted

f) plants in nurseries are bred from seed trees in nature. no GMO exists as far as I know.

g) "ecological acceptable". that's a funny expression. "ecology" is extremely "accepting", it even accepts 3 km of ice cover for thousands of years...

h) spraying forests with pesticides is not allowed anymore, since the 70-80s I believe

i) erosion is not an issue since the humus layer is very thick in boreal forests and holds firm together. it's an issue in the Alps though, but that is more due to steep angles. but now we are takling about Sweden.

j) see f)

k) no

l) don't understand your question

m) everything can always be done better, continuous improvement. that's what drives human mankind (you seem to be longing to go back to the 1800s though).

n) that has not been done in Sweden since the 1970s as far as I know

o) animals (what is "mammon"?) always wander between different habitats depending on what maximises their energy input. there are migrations between summer and winter too.

by the way, the elk/moose population has never been so big as it is today. well, with one exception, in the 70/80s it was even bigger! the elk/moose just loved the large clearcut areas(!) because it produced a tons of plants and bush which they could feed on.

p) what an igonrant statement! swedish forest companies today has a large variety of competencies, everything from biologists, to foresters and, engineers, also as indicated, economists. diversity is good.

q) feel free to introduce something more sustainable. it's an advantage if it works in reality too.

r) don't understand what you are trying to say

s) the fact alone the the amount of forests nearly has doubled since the 1920s, I believe this indicates that the law is quite protective

t) yes, we can use flint axes & horses too, but I am not sure you would like to pay the cost for that type of harvested wood...

Finally, no I am not from the wood industry. I just happen to have my own forest, and I have a big interest in forest management and biology. However, I have friends & relatives (hence "insider") working in this industry and I have been able to follow the developments on very close range over the years.

The Swedish forest industry has not been perfect over the years, but they have made tremendous improvements and they still continue to do so.

The rest of your comments continue in the same erratic way so I won't even bother to reply to it. Well, one thing, it was rather funny:

"I lived about 1,5 Year In a forest, without any electric energy, without a heating system, only a very little oven, the next possibility to buy something 7 km far away…."

I think it's even worse. I think you live in a cave, or possibly on the bottom of a lake, with no contact with the rest of the world (and reality) whatsoever.

Just don't forget to extend your power chord next time you switch on your computer...

Thanks Mark for the kind words.

Indeed, I feel like a women's activist, in a Taliban camp...


PS. Just happened to see one more detail:

"This is right, but a normal citizen have only „Aftonbladet“ and other newspapers, they cannot proof like on other places too, what the industry say..."

One more of your ignorant/arrogant and condescending comments.

A large part of the population, especially outside the cities, are in fact putting on their boots and go out straight into the bush.

There are, e.g., close to 0.5 million registered hunters in Sweden, who have to get out there in order to practise their hobby.

Claiming that we would get our sources of information only through "Aftonbladet" is a load of crap on your behalf and I will ignore you from now on. You are an unserious fanatic.

Dear, generous, honestly omniscient highness Mister “Inside”,

I believe really that you know all about protection the earth from stupid unknown people like me.
Only Insiders like You shall be allowed to take decisions in the world.
All other people like me shall be living in slavery and be damned. -Or in a cave deep under the world. So I decided, after few days thinking in humbleness that this will be my last posting in this discussion. I cannot approach your knowledge, so I waste my time in future….
Maybe I can ask You to give your real name and profession, but maybe I haven’t enough authority to ask this, sorry.
But for you are so sapiently, maybe you don’t will understand what critical people from living at the backside of the moon want to say.
Thanks for Your teaching in so simple thinks like 200.000 Elks and 500.000 hunters, the best protectors of the forests, and few sciences payed from the industry cannot be in error that this genetic deserts really sustainable forests.
We must save our forest (what a bad word for the German “Wald”, forest means always a more human changes “Wald”….) in clear-cut them all after 50 -150 Years, that they don’t can go into a climax stadium what will be a disaster for the forests of the World. Please FSC and PEFC help us to get this stadium as fast as possible, please.
The really lovely companies which use the wood coming out of the forest know only the best way how to protect the forest, sure. -For they must use them in further future……
But please spend a little of your time and let me give few comments back:
First of all a question: Is it right, that we discuss about Sweden and not another countryside?
When yes let me say, I love really the Swedish people, the mentality, the landscape, the architecture and all. But not how they arrange the forests.
And one apologizes too: I mean “mammals”, mot “mammons”, mistake from me.)
To Your comments:

a) aha, then I must be blind and my digital cameras make thousand of pictures of a Fata Morgana. But sorry: Stora Enso give me the answer in a living dispute, that they take of mainly all the biomass for using as Bio energy, crown and a high part of the roots as well and this is a legal and wanted Way from the authorities.
b) I can Show You several areas in middle Sweden, were they have cut much bigger areas then only 5 hectares like its legal (I just search in the Swedish law what is the biggest clear-cut section what’s is legal allowed and which conditions must be running that they can cut much bigger areas, few reasons I know). Probably, maybe I will start a legal court in Sweden.
c) The industrial agriculture system make “clear cuts” minimum once per Year, take out the mainly biomass without the roots, plough the rest and plant back seed from Monsanto and Pioneer, hybrids, same genetically code, produced thousand of miles away. The same idea behind when You make clear cuts in forest…. For it work in Agriculture system, must work in forest systems too. I give you right, that specially in North Sweden its more “rentable” to build up forest then foods. But this has a strong influence in the structure of the people as well.
d) D) Oh dear, where we must start now the discussion. Homo sapiens is a natural species, so all what he do is natural too???? These “picea” was planted from Humans from one mother tree from Finnland??? Oh, sorry, this I don’t know, but then must have Darwin totally unright too, or?
e) 25000 Young trees on 1 hectare, so 2,5 tress per m² is really nice food for the elks, so must be a good system, when they all alive, what wonderful wood resource! (Horst Stern has called this in the 70th “Bretterfabrik”……. You have the fantastic system for the wood industry, that all trees are about the same genetic codes, so very good to count, same oldness. So you can plan very early, when You cut them and take them in the “sawmills”. The industry really must love these forests, I believe….
f) But from other genetic landscape, other microclimate, maybe from foreign countries, (for example have a huge Bulgarian Nursery export in time of soviet union a Hugh quantity of trees till the early 90th sold and delivered to Scandinavia (Finland I know sure, but I think Sweden and Denmark as well, much cheaper then to have own nurseries. And, staying at this example, Bulgaria is now in the EU, its not forbidden (EU LAW) and its good practise to import from SE Europe. “Pioneer” is experimentating with GMO of “Pinus radiata” since several Years in Europe, there isn’t any law in Europe till now that forbid this. But the plants are not living long time in natural use; it’s only a question of time till it works. But Hybrids and “in vitro” cultivation is general in use all over the world for forest trees as well….
g) Yes sure, and Sweden is growing and get always higher and higher, sure….. But done from the Human race, they have ha a so strong refrigerator at that time???? -This is a fraudulent misunderstand of the here meant ecology. Do you know the scientific definition of ecology???
h) About 5 Years ago, I Use the “allemanrättan” and made camping in Dalarna, come a little airplane and spread insecticides over my head at an area of several km². I must dream this, but the Swedish forest ministry give me the answer, that it was allowed for they have typically for this forest management system Problems with the “bark beetle” (Scolytinae), and the forest owner get very fast permission to spray. Sweden is on of the biggest users of forest pesticide in Europe as I know.
i) You will tell me, that Sweden hasn’t any erosion problems in the clear-cut mountains?
m) You have right, but why You don’t start to do this?, why You protect this system, why You believe then, that FSC is a good system?
n) My eyes and photos say something others, it’s a statistic “problem”, far away from the touristic streets, after the Potemkin’s villages. I have in my folders here minimum 3 hugely clear cuts (not cut after or to protect calamity!) and one from last Year where I get just much more Info’s about to fight in Law against the owner.
o) No comment necessary
p) At least they have at all really good Lawyers, and a good marketing machine, that people shall believe its all best practice what they do (FSC is nothing more then a marketinginstrument as well like everybody know, that its fraudulent, tricky, inconsequent system and the certificate holders can do what they want with the wood, nobody can check, for only checkable in the papers.
q) I just start since 21 Years. Again I ask You….. : You still believe, clear-cut is the only way to make a sustainable, stable ecosystem in the boreal forest?
r) Just easy: The question is: FSC; for the companies love there Forest and want the best for the forest, or FSC (and all the other fraudulent systems) to protect there interest and on a cheap and easy to trick system used as a marketing instrument.
s) Wrong and not true. It’s a longer discussion what happened before, what was in 1920s, how they have counted the closed area of forest there and how they do it know; When I remember right, one definition is to be 20% of the surface covered now with crowns of the trees, and then its counted as a closed standing forest area. When I remember right, was counted in the 20s around 80% covered and a minimum area of few hectares, excluded parks and “not for wood use” areas, but here I am not sure. Too long ago, that I study intensive this thema for a hearing at the German Government.
But the quality of the forest: Monoculture, Plenterforest, Plantation, even-aged forest; This have nothing comment? It’s not counted in Your mind? Only the typical industrial relevant point of view (From the total covered forest area they count back as well how much they can cut, so they, the industry, are very interested on a large covered area of forest for there own plans as well, Plus You have CO² certificates from the growing forest, plus a good image and so on. But yes, will be, that when You count the same way then in older days, the forest area grow up. But please have a deep look at the reasons (I don’t discuss her, too much time will flow away which I haven’t)
t) Oh what bullshit you want me to believe here. Maybe You haven’t read that I am a wood trader since quarter century and I know very well the costs of the wood. Let me tell that a big German forest owner with 13000 hectares, a bigger part in Needle wood, come back from harvesting the forest to Motormanuell horse management in much as cheaper costs. -And what you make with the harvesters, when, like now, the use of wood go strong back? Who pay the leasing when they don’t work? Horses you take out on the grass, have about no costs. And who pay the damage the harvesters make? (oh sorry, they don’t make) It’s a discussion of always bigger, greater faster, cheaper (like now the planning of wood arrived 1000m per minute, but You need 3 forklifts to fullfill this machine and a machine hall of minimum 500m length to arrange this speed. When You have the right dimension, You have one truck with 40m³ ready in little more then 5 minutes. Gigantismen !
The rest I don’t thinks its worth to give comment, I am a forest owners as well and watching the forest and Woodindustriy since 35 Years. But now I must cloed, spent too much time. I must no going to my business, selling wood, so destroy SE European forest, in clear-cut as well, this is, why I say I have started very strong to build up another system of Forestmanagment, but then start FSC and all forward movement are destroyed in one moment, 10 Years of hard work are flying in the air in 3 month.
Last to repeat: I don’t say, that the Swedish people have only Aftonbladet to get there mind (for other readers in Germany: About “Bildzeitung”), but several argument from Your comment are on the level of Aftonbladet. No, the Swedish people are very cultivated, have a phantastic school system and so on, like I wrote and I can repeat: I love Sweden, and just was not fare away to become a Swedish citizen to live near Pilipstad……


Hold your horses. Just face the facts. The forest industry cluster is too big and too important for both the Swedish and the Finnish economies so why would they creep for some environmental fundamentalists, a minority group, and their twisted countryside romantic view on the world and through that dig their own grave.

Thanks to the mighty car industry lobbying in Germany, Germany won't forbid free speed, and heavy NOx & CO2 pollution, on the Autobahn either, so let's call it a draw shall we.

Gerrit, you said:

"...Sweden is on of the biggest users of forest pesticide in Europe as I know."

Google on "6-16 tab. Quantities of pesticides sold to forestry incl. nurseries" and have a look at the excel table from svo.se

First of all, in Swedish forstry insecticides are mainly used at nurseries, secondly the quantity is hardly significant, about 7 tonnes in 2007, to compare with 10,000 tonnes for country total, which probably is used in agriculture.

At the same time, look at this picture:


...and try to get an idea where the Chemicals are spread in Europe.

Why do you spread completely false propaganda? What is your agenda, apart from b***shitting FSC?

And here is more of your propaganda and bold lies:

"s) Wrong and not true. It’s a longer discussion what happened before, what was in 1920s, how they have counted the closed area of forest there and how they do it know; When I remember right, one definition is to be 20% of the surface covered now with crowns of the trees, and then its counted as a closed standing forest area. When I remember right, was counted in the 20s around 80% covered and a minimum area of few hectares, excluded parks and “not for wood use” areas, but here I am not sure."



National definitions according to Swedish National Forest Inventory (NFI)

Forest land
Land which is suitable for forestry and not significantly used for other purposes. Potential yield capacity is at least 1 m3sk (stem volume over bark) per hectare per year.



Natural Grazing land
Land which is predominately used for grazing and is not ploughed regularly.

Arable land
Land used for crops and which is regularly ploughed.

Wet areas with peat building plant communities. Potential yield capacity is less than 1 m3sk per hectare per year. Also included in this category is a small fraction of tundra like areas which also have a potential yield capacity of less than 1 m3sk per hectare per year.

Rock surface
Rock surface and other areas of non productive land. Includes bare bedrock and stoney ground. Potential yield capacity is less than 1 m3sk per hectare per year.

Subalpine forest
Transition zone between forest land and areas above the highest continuous treeline where tree cover does not constitute stands.

Other wooded land
Land not classified as forest, spanning more than 0.5 hectares, with trees higher than 5 meters and a conopy 5–10 per cent, or trees able to reach these thresholds in situ, or with a combined cover of shrubs, bushes and trees above 10 per cent. It does not include land that is predominantly under agriculture or urban land use.

High mountains
Mountain areas above the highest continuous treeline. Birch trees can still be common but coniferous tree are rare. Potential yield capacity is less than 1 m3sk per hectare per year.

Nature reserves and restricted land
National parks, nature reserves, and artillery ranges.

Urban land
Developed areas (including parks and industrial sites), grounds and parks outside developed areas etc.

Other areas
Powerlines cuttings crossing forest land, roads, railways, timber collection areas, gravel pits etc.

International definitions according to FAO

Land spanning more than 0.5 hectares with trees higher than 5 metres and a conopy cover of more than 10 per cent, or trees able to reach these thresholds in situ. It does not include land that is predominantly under agriculture or urban landuse.

Other wooded land
1. Land which is not forested but supports trees, or has potential to support trees (without production enhancing intervention) of at least 5 m and with a tree crown cover of at least 5 percent.

2. Land which is not forested but supports trees, or has potential to support trees (without production enhancing intervention) of at least 5 m and bushes of at least 0.5 m. The combined crown cover of trees and bushes is at least 10 percent.

It does not include land that is predominantly under agriculture or urban land use.


Swedish National Forest Inventory (NFI) IS ALSO THE SURVEY THAT HAS BEEN GOING ON SINCE THE 1920s.


Dear Mats
only today i find little time to answer. Next days I flight again to watch forests in the easts..., of course climeneutral for 1,5$ per flight. But I have a really clear conscience. So I havnt time...Just face the facts,
Now come the truth from You: This fraudulent certification sheme of Forests is only a question of economy, have nothing to do with enviromentalfriendly, sustainable.... You have 100% right! Hear hear, thanks for these clear words. I will copy this in Press releases. Is this the meaning of FSC? Can I cite this in a trial? What I ever thought, no its written! What mention it, that the clime is changing because deforetration, what mention when the deserting go straight ahead. What mention, if few milliard people lost at the end. (AS long the german Car industry lobby ake shit too. What mention it, when the ecosystem in this habitat will break ( Here I must say, maybe its better to go fast enough, so lets support FSC and cut all forest in the world, give everybody a nice Stiehl chainsaw (Oh Sorry, can be an Husquarna as well) its better the Homo "Sapiens" disappears and take there own grave in the next decades) The only what is interesting for me is my $….
And nice to hear that You called me “environmental fundamentalists”. Thanks for this laugh attac. Thanks…. How can one people on this planet be so egocentric like You? I believe, all others are spleeny and have to go to there Psychiatrist; they don’t want to let You get millionaire from steeling their life subsistence. And steeling from the child’s, and the child’s cannot fight against. Cruelly this guys.
Make your one world and live there on the Mars or Jupiter, but go out of my life please. With picutres of clear-cut forests, teh best system in the world on hte walldrobe.
I believe, You shall take over the CEO of FSC International, Somebody must tell the world now what’s going on, when this stupid Andre don’t do this; the PaP industry must grow faster the anything other, Treedeserts are really enviromentallfriendly and sustainable, Clearcuts of defintelly more then 50 hektars are it too, for they are FSC certificated (good for my pocket as well, for just the cheapest way to get Biomass)
And we need much more cows to heat up the Atmosphere,so we need then less clothes; So people, please eat Mc Donalds Burgers!. All this stupid Ice on the world, need Atomic energy to defreeze it…. Few collateral mistakes, few million negros dead,...bad thinks happened, what cost the world….
ON the second comment I can only laugh about so childishly believing on one excel sheet. I will not write any comments, You must find out Yourself. But I don’t waste time here.
Yes, Sweden have really the best forestsystem! This is the truth.
Do You have read Your own third comments? Please recapitulate, what You are saying with this! “1 m³ per anno growing capacity”….. really, a nice definition of forest land (and in the end not too far away from hte FAO). But this have nothing to do with the discussion of clear-cut forest. But in Your egocentric way of life, this is true, i believe. No discussion about! Thanks for You clear opinion and outing Yourself. Everybody shall do this!

yours faithfullyl
Gerriet Harms

For some reason I start to think of this famous German expression: "grösster Furzarsch aller Zeiten"(?).

Your acute and endless diarrhea of empty words is a perfect match to that line...

PS. One holy and untouchable rule for quoting ('“1 m³ per anno growing capacity”') is that it should be exact.

But, once again, accuracy and falsifying 'facts' doesn't seem to bother you very much...

Thanks for YOur open word. Say anything about Your style. Exactelly this is, what i mean. Your style of discussion. very nice outing.
Why You dont say "Adolf" to me?
Own Brain seems not to much in Your ownership. But equal, i dont continate this discussion with YOu any longer.

Phew, your last line is the best you have said so far. What a relief.

this site is helping

Swedish Society for Nature Conservation resigns from FSC Sweden | FSC-Watch
FSC Watch: Swedish Society for Nature Conservation resigns from FSC Sweden
In June 2010, Swedish Society for Nature Conservation resigned from FSC Sweden. Two years ago, the SSNC left the board of FSC Sweden. As the largest environmental organis...

Add a comment

Please leave these fields blank (spam trap):

No HTML please.

You can edit this comment until 30 minutes after posting.

< 132 older entries86 newer entries >