The old-growth spruce forest at Goussavare which is planned for felling by Sveaskog. Photo: Björn Mildh.
Representatives from the FSC certified and state-owned company Sveaskog have recently stated that the company will not log the old-growth forest at Guossavare in the municipality of Arjeplog in northern Sweden. However, the regional Swedish Society for Nature Conservation and Maskaure Sami village are sceptical and state that as long as the forest area is notified for felling, Sveaskog is not trustworthy.
Here is a new letter to Sveaskog from Björn Mildh and Johanna Nilsson from SSNC in Luleå and Leif Lundberg from Maskaure Sami village:
Dear Anette and Fredrik,
On request, representatives from Sveaskog have stated that the company will not log the forest on Guossavare.
However, we have long experience showing that no woodland key habitat or important reindeer grazing forest is safeguarded on Sveaskog’s land. This also applies for Guossavare.
– The forest is still notified for final felling (just like at Strandberget, another high conservation value forest planned to be logged, coordinates, Sweref 99: N 7290865; E 717830).
– The marking of the transport road from the forest to the forest road is already done.
– The undergrowth has already been cleared in the forest. (This is done in order to make it easier for the forest machines to drive through).
– Sveaskog’s map of nature conservation forests shows that the area that we documented in the photo album is not a conservation value forest, but instead a production forest. This is also evident from the coordinates in our letter to Sveaskog. If the company claims otherwise, you can visit the forest and check the coordinates where the photos are taken.
There is a nature conservation forest further to the northeast, but it is not included in the area we documented.
It is convenient for Sveaskog to make new classifications of nature conservation forests when it is appropriate for them. They can quickly change the status of the forest. There is no transparency, everything is managed internally, entirely. In addition, Sveaskog does not share its natural value assessments publicly on which the classifications are based. The natural forest at Lill-Skarja is a recent example.
For the company, words and actions are different things.
Sveaskog is not trustworthy.
Yours sincerely,
Björn Mildh, member of the Swedish Society for Nature Conservation
Leif Lundberg, Maskaure Sami village
Johanna Nilsson, member of the Swedish Society for Nature Conservation in Luleå