Hostname: page-component-788cddb947-m6qld Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-10-19T12:37:48.388Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Problems Related to Conservation of Coniferous Forest in Norway

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 August 2009

Harald Korsmo
Harald Korsmo
Affiliation:
Research Ecologist, Norwegian Institute for Nature Research, Agricultural University of Norway (AUN), Urbygningen, N-1432 Ås, Norway.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In this paper, it is argued that the Norwegian Government must tackle the problems related to the conservation of coniferous forests more seriously and urgently than hitherto, and not let this important task be governed by commercial interests. A national plan based on political, non-scientific motives will not safeguard these ecocomplexes and their component ecosystems and the endangered species found in them.

A practical way to solve the time-consuming disagreements between environmental authorities and forest owners would be to guarantee full compensation, and to start paying for sites of high conservation interest immediately. This compensation must ensure that the forest owners can fulfil such financial commitments as they already have. An alternative would be the exchange of privately-owned forest for public forest land, including forests owned by ‘The Educational Fund’.

The Ministries involved must learn to cooperate in such work. If they do not, Norway's credibility in environmental matters may suffer. Solutions must be reached which do not put sectorial interests before national or international environmental values, and which guarantee the protection of a representative selection of coniferous forests according to scientific principles.

Type
Main Papers
Information
Environmental Conservation , Volume 18 , Issue 3 , Autumn 1991 , pp. 255 - 259
Copyright
Copyright © Foundation for Environmental Conservation 1991

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bråkenhielm, S. (1982). Urskogar. Inventering av Urskogartade områden i Sverige, 1: Allmän Del. Skogsstyrelsen, Jönköping, Sweden: No. 1507, 107 pp., illustr. + map.Google Scholar
Dahl, E., Elven, R., Moen, A. & Skogen, A. (1986). Vegetasjonsregionkart over Norge 1:1500 000. Nasjonalatlas for Norge. Statens Kartverk, Ringerike, Norway: 1 map (Sheet 4.1.1).Google Scholar
Dalland, Ø. (1978). Preservation of Nature and local economic activity — conflict and mutual interest? Geoforum, 9, pp. 49–81, illustr.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Direktoratet for Naturforvaltning (1988). Forslag til retningslinjer for barskogvern. Direktoratet for Naturforvaltning, Rapport nr 3–1988, 96 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Hansson, K. (1957). Norsk kirkerett. Aschehoug & Co., Oslo, Norway: 9 pp.Google Scholar
Hertzberg, E. (1898). Om Eiendomsretten til del Norske Kirkegods. A.W. Brøggers Bogtrykkeri, Kristiania, Norway: 255 pp.Google Scholar
Huse, S. & Korsmo, H. (1987). Über den Schutz von naturnahem Wald in Norwegen. Pp. 60–8 in 2. Österreichisches Urwald-Symposium Ort-Gmunden 1987 (Ed. Mayer, H.). Waldbau-Institut, Universität für Bodenkultur, Wien, Austria: vi + 218 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
IUCN (1980). World Conservation Strategy: Living Resource Conservation for Sustainable Development. International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, 1196 Gland, Switzerland: vii + c. 40 unnumbered pp., illustr.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirke- og Undervisningsdepartementet (1985). St. meld, nr 64 (1984–85). Forvaltning av Opplysningsvesenets fonds eiendommer. Kirke- og Undervisningsdepartementet, Oslo, Norway: 97 pp.Google Scholar
Korsmo, H. (1985). Analyses of temperate deciduous forest communities in South-Norway (summary). Contribution from the Norwegian inventory project for reserve planning in IBP — CT Silva Section. Forestry Abstracts, 46, p. 632.Google Scholar
Korsmo, H. (1987). Status for Vernet Barskog i Norge. [Status of protected coniferous forest in Norway.] Økoforsk Utredning 1987, No. 5, 41 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Korsmo, H. (1991). Conserving coniferous forest in Norway — a critical time for international environmental obligations. Ambio, 20(6), pp. 238–43, illustr.Google Scholar
Korsmo, H., Angell-Petersen, I., Bergmann, H.H. & Moe, B. (1989). Verneplan for barskog: Regionrapport for Midt-Norge [Conservation Plan for Coniferous Forests: Regional Report for Central Norway]. NINA Utredning No. 6, 99 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Korsmo, H., Moe, B. & Svalastog, D. (1991). Verneplan for barskog. Regionrapport for Øst-Norge [Conservation Plan for Coniferous Forests: Region Report for East Norway]. NINA Utredning 25, 190 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Landbruksdepartementet (1984). Naeringspolitikken i skogbruket. St. meld, nr 18 (1984–85). Landbruksdepartementet, Oslo, Norway: 148 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Moen, A. (1973). Landsplan for Myrreservater i Norge [Norwegian National Plan for Mire Nature Reserves]. Norsk Geogr. Tidsskr., 27, pp. 173–93, illustr.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nordiska Ministerrådet (1984). Naturgeografisk Regionindelning av Norden. Nordiska Ministerrådet, Stockholm, Sweden: 274 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Statistisk Sentralbyrå (1983). Landbruksteljing 1979, Hefte VII: Skogbruk [Census of Agriculture and Forestry 1979, Vol. VII: Forestry]. Norges offisielle statistikk B 403, Engers Boktrykkeri A/S, Otta, Norway: 236 pp.Google Scholar
World Commission on Environment and Development (cited as WCED) (1987). Our Common Future. Oxford University Press, Oxford, England, UK: xv + 383 pp.Google Scholar