The Ukrainian forest

Every spring and fall we expect alarming news about floods in Zakarpattia. People say it is because forests are being cut down there on a massive scale. Nor is there much optimism in reports from certain information sources that say existing forests are not adding sufficient amounts of oxygen to Ukraine’s environment. The conclusion is: our forests are exhausted.

This assumption is supported by ordinary Ukrainians and some researchers, among them academicians and noted politicians. The press is also issuing contradictory reports. Some journalists claim that too many trees are being cut down in Ukraine; others, that the felling rate is too low. On the eve of Ukraine’s Forestry Workers’ Day (Sept. 17), UKRINFORM observer Olena Pozdniakova interviewed Viktor CHERVONY, Chairman of the State Forestry Committee of Ukraine.

Mr. Chervony, are our forests Ukraine’s “green lungs”?

V.Ch.: Ukraine is a unique country in terms of forestry. It has several natural zones: Polissian, forest steppe, steppe, and the Crimean and Carpathian highland forests. It is entirely correct to state that Ukraine is a large forest country; it is Europe’s eighth largest, with some 10 million hectares of forests. This potential keeps increasing. In the first years after World War Two there were considerably fewer forests in Ukraine than today. This was a consequence of the management on the part of previous generations, when forests were felled to make charcoal, with an emphasis on agriculture, sugar industry, and so on. Economic efforts in preceding historical periods, as well as wars, inflicted a great deal of damage on Ukraine’s forestry industry.

What are Ukraine’s needs in relation to forests?

V.Ch.: We produce some 15 million cubic meters of timber and some of this has no market demand in Ukraine. This is nonsense. The reason is that fine timber processing is done on a small scale here; our woodworking industry is just getting on its feet. Note that under the Soviets construction was the number-one consumer of our products. At present, timber supplies to the construction industry have decreased. Today, people want plastic windows, hi-tech flooring, and no roofs are made of wood. Therefore, few of our products are consumed through construction.

But we have to look a couple of years ahead. It’s a fact that gas is becoming increasingly more expensive, coal is getting harder to extract, and there are oil problems. Therefore, the economy needs resources. We’re talking about biofuel, but forests are a renewable resource and they’re simply being wasted.

How about the quality of our forests and the way they are being preserved?

V.Ch.: Ukrainian forests are in adequate condition; they are not exhausted. Coniferous, pine, and oak forests are predominant in Ukraine — and these are the most precious varieties. Ukraine has the second largest number of oak forests in Europe. All told, I would say that our forest industries are managed on a sufficiently high level.

Our structure includes a government-run forestry administration that provides adequately for all forestry projects in Ukraine, developing and supplying every forestry unit with documentation covering the next decade. All these draft documents are subject to approval by the Ministry of Environmental Protection. Every year felling quotas are approved for every enterprise. By the way, while walking in the woods, you must have noticed those “quarter poles.” We have charts and layouts of what we call “quarters” — forest sections — and each one is recorded in our books: age, trunk diameter, and so on. All this constitutes a well-balanced mechanism. We know precisely where to cut down trees, in which year, how many, what kind of trees, and what to replace them with. All this is coordinated with the ministry’s structures and is controlled by them, so it is wrong to claim that we’re cutting down trees wherever and however many we please.

If our forest industry is so well managed, why isn’t it solvent?

V.Ch.: Our forestry management has complicated financial relations with the government that do not correspond to modern realities. That’s why Ukraine’s forest industry cannot be solvent right now. Last year, this industry received 250 million hryvnias from the budget. At the same time, we paid over 600 million to the budget and all state funds. By the way, every hryvnia the state invests in the forest industry secures almost three hryvnias’ worth of returns to such state funds. Therefore, forestry is not a burden on the state. The largest tax payments are made by enterprises operating in the Carpathian Mountains and Polissia, because they are solvent and profitable there. We’re directing funds received from the state to the eastern and southern regions of Ukraine, where forests are discharging exclusively ecological functions and thus cannot exist without state support.

Of course, if a different pattern were applied, like the one in Poland, we would stand a fair chance of turning it into a solvent industry. Thus, Polish enterprises are exempted from payments for using forest resources and are given other benefits. A special extra-budgetary fund was set up whereby every enterprise transferred a percentage of its timber sale revenues. The government then reallocated this money to help needy enterprises. If we practiced this pattern, I believe that the Ukrainian forest industry would be largely profitable today.

What is preventing this pattern from being implemented here?

V.Ch.: It would mean changing the entire taxation base and ratifying a number of laws. We are prepared for this. We have a new Forest Code that is quite progressive and for the most part ensures effective forestry management. But dozens of bylaws have to be passed. Some documents have been submitted to the cabinet. I hope that the finance ministry and the tax authorities support our initiative. We have to combine efforts to overcome these Soviet vestiges. After all, the so-called stump tax is practiced only in Russia and other post-Soviet countries, nowhere else in the world. Russia has vast territories of natural forests, and it levies the same tax on them as on natural resources, like coal, gas, and oil. Ukraine’s forestry industry includes almost 50 percent of planted forests, which means that this is not a natural resource but a man-made asset.

Our forests are being flooded in the west and drying out in the south. In many cases this depends on the forestation of river banks. Sailing down the Desna River in Ukraine, you see verdant banks and trees. In Russia, there are practically no trees, mostly meadows. Even the Soviets were concerned about the Desna and its unique waters. Back in the 1970s, the Desna Committee was tasked with coordinating tree planting on its banks. Is there anything like that happening now?

V.Ch.: Honestly, I’ve never heard about that committee. But I can say that we are embarking on new forestation projects, first by planting trees alongside small and big rivers. Nothing can be done here without coordination, because we need systematic water protection measures up and down the river. Also, this is a long-standing problem; protective forestation was slowed down even under the Soviets: financing such works stopped in the 1980s.

After Ukraine became independent, the government began financing plantation projects in sandy areas. At one time Europe’s only desert was known as Nyzhniodniproviski pisky (areas of sand in the lower reaches of the Dnipro). Well, things came to a head there. Now this area is planted with trees, and sand drift has stopped. In fact, it boasts beautiful pine groves, although it’s time we replaced some of them. A tree has to be cut down in its final phase, when it is still discharging its ecological functions. Then it can be used for commercial purposes or as a source of energy. If this is not done, we’ll have to spend money on putting this forested area to rights. A pine tree grows for 120 years and attains maturity at 90. These trees, which grow in extreme conditions, have become exhausted at 45 years, so they have to be replaced by young and productive ones. A normal forest environment will be created on such territories only after three or four forest generations.

However, scientifically grounded forestry management is confronted by inadequate legislation and misguided public opinion. You see, no one doubts that grass is planted, it has to be mowed now and then, and that ripe wheat has to be harvested. The same is true of forestry. Here, the equilibrium between economic and ecological interests must be clearly established in legislative terms. Our society must realize that foresters use their band saws not because they want to earn a quick buck, but because these are the laws of nature and the science of forestry.

People used to cut down trees and burn them to have arable soils and pastures. Now a reverse process is taking place. What kind of soils does the forest industry have for enhancing its potential?

V.Ch.: According to the Ukrainian Agrarian Academy, nearly 10 million hectares have been withdrawn from agricultural use. Together with the State Land Resources Committee of Ukraine and various regional state administrations we are working to detect reserve lands and transfer them to the state forest fund and for subsequent forestation. Scientifically- backed forestation in Ukraine requires the creation of two million hectares of new forests. This is a solid number, but we don’t have to plant these forests overnight. It will take us 20 years.

Does this require a lot of money?

V.Ch.: When we hear about bank credit compensations worth 700 million hryvnias whenever the budget bill is being debated in parliament, we say: give us 20-30 million hryvnias’ worth of budget appropriations for next year. This will allow us to increase the territory of our forests twofold. But this requires good will from the government, the Verkhovna Rada, and parliamentarians on all levels.

We have placed 300,000 hectares on our balance sheet. New forests have been created in southern and eastern Ukraine, where none existed for 200 or more years. Under the government- adopted Forestry Development Concept, we must increase the territory of new forests twice a year. This year we planted 16,000 hectares; next year we will plant 30,000-35,000, then 60,000, and 100,000 in 2010. We’ll have forests covering an area of two million hectares, thus reaching the scientifically substantiated forestation rate in Ukraine.

And what is this rate?

V.Ch.: Considering the area of its forests, Ukraine may be considered a country rich in forest resources. At the same time, our forestation rate is 15 percent. This, unfortunately, places us next to last on the European forest ratings list. Of course, we would like to have more forests than we do, but we shouldn’t forget that the steppe and forest- steppe comprise half the territory of Ukraine. Also, we must regard the diversity of our climate zones as an asset that nature has bestowed on Ukrainians. True, we aren’t likely to reach Europe’s average forestation level, but raising our level to the scientifically substantiated level of 20% in the next 20 years is absolutely realistic.