DISORIENTATION IN PRIVATE FOREST MANAGEMENT

U ovoj smo rubrici s raznih gledišta skretali pozornost čitatelja na činjenice glede stanja i načina gospodarenja šumama u državnom vlasništvu. Ove godine, kada slavimo 250 godina hrvatskoga šumarstva, osvrćući se na proteklo razdoblje, bilježimo uzlazne i silazne trendove, uzrokovane ponajprije političkom situacijom. Nakon zadnjih 50-tak godina značajno uzlaznog trenda, posljednjih godina bilježimo stagnaciju a potom i pad, neodgovorno se odmičući od načela potrajnog gospodarenja i sveobuhvatnog korištenja i upravljanja šumom kao obnovljivim resursom i najsloženijim ekosustavom, poistovjećujući ga s tvorničkom halom.Šume u državnom vlasništvu (oko 78 %) povjerene su na gospodarenje trgovačkom društvu Hrvatske šume d.o.o. Što je s privatnim šumama? Naravno, s njima gospodare privatni šumoposjednici, i prema Zakonu o šumama (ZOŠ) trebali bi gospodariti kao i u državnim šumama. U članku 8. ZOŠ-a stoji da su Trgovačko društvo, ali i privatni šumoposjednici dužni gospodariti šumama održavajući i unapređujući biološku i krajobraznu raznolikost te skrbiti o zaštiti šumskog ekosustava. Navodi se 12 točaka, od kojih primjerice jedna kaže da njegu i sječu šuma treba provoditi na način kojim se ne uzrokuju trajne štete ekosustava. . . . U članku 9. se pak kaže da su svi šumoposjednici dužni gospodariti šumama u skladu s planovima . . . .Članak 10. propisuje da su svi dužni sanirati štete gdje je izvršeno pustošenje, bespravna sječa ili krčenje šuma. Ono na što želimo posebno upozoriti, definirano je člankom 31. ZOŠ-a koji kaže da se drvo posječeno u šumi i izvan šume te ostali šumski proizvodi mogu transportirati izvan šume samo ako su propisno obilježeni i ako je za njih izdana propisna popratnica. Da li se privatni šumoposjednici drže ZOŠ-a i tko i kako to kontrolira? Ovih dana stižu nam gotovo svakodnevno vijesti s terena o nekontroliranim sječama, gotovo bi se moglo reći bespoštednom „haračenju“ u privatnim šumama. Tko doznačuje i da li se uopće doznačuju stabla za sječu, tko klasira sortimente i odakle sumnjive pločice na sortimentima, kako i s kojim dokumentima sortimenti idu u izvoz, te naposljetku može li sve to bez nekih „sprega“ uredno funkcionirati? Koriste li neki privatni šumoposjednici svojevoljno ili po nagovoru tešku gospodarsku situaciju, smatrajući kako je zbog teškoća sve to dozvoljeno, a kvazi poduzetnici se beskrupulozno bogate? Ako se nešto i poduzme protiv toga, pitamo se, neće li i to završiti kao i ono s krađom šljunka? Inače, Šumsko-gospodarske planove odobrava resorno Ministarstvo na prijedlog Hrvatskih šuma d.o.o. za državne, a sada Savjetodavna služba za privatne šume. Kažemo sada, jer je sve usluge u privatnim šumama do 2006. godine odobravalo i uglavnom dobro vodilo državno poduzeće (Šumsko gospodarstvo, JP Hrvatske šume i napose Hrvatske šume d.o.o.). Pojedini šumarski stručnjaci, ponegdje i manji odjeli, bili su zaduženi za privatne šume. Europska unija 2003. god. brojnim deklaracijama, konvencijama i direktivama daje potporu ruralnom razvoju, naglašavajući važnost privatnih šuma glede održivog razvoja. Oko 40 % potpora odnosilo se na šumarstvo. To je bio glavni poticaj da je na temelju ZOŠ-a (NN 140/05) Uredbom Vlade RH od 2. srpnja 2006. god. (NN 64/06) utemeljena Šumarska savjetodavna služba, koja je imala javne ovlasti. Ona je međutim iz financijskih razloga, smatrajući se to paralelnim (duplim) troškom, ukinuta 2010. god. i nadležni poslovi vraćeni su natrag u Hrvatske šume d.o.o. No, Hrvatski sabor 14. studenog 2013. god. raspravlja o Prijedlogu Zakona o izmjenama i dopunama zakona o Poljoprivrednoj savjetodavnoj službi, i resorni ministar obrazlaže potrebu promjena (korištenje EU fondova za ruralni razvoj već u 2014. god.), promjenu naziva i potrebu hitnog postupka. Tako se novim Zakonom o savjetodavnoj službi šumarstvo „utapa“ u nešto izmijenjenu i dopunjenu Poljoprivrednu savjetodavnu službu, sada pod jedinstvenim nazivom „Savjetodavna služba.“, kao specijalizirana javna ustanova za obavljanje poslova savjetodavne djelatnosti u poljoprivredi, ruralnom razvoju, ribarstvu i unapređenju gospodarenja šumama i šumskim zemljištima šumoposjednika, a djeluje putem središnjeg ureda i podružnica (21). Dakle, još jednom izbačeni iz naslova i stavljeni kao prirepak na kraj rečenice, jer su naši „jaki“ pregovarači s EU smetnuli s uma da hrvatsko šumarstvo s gotovo 80 % državnih šuma nije samo djelić poljoprivrede kao u EU, pa se sada kompenzira učinjena šteta kroz povlačenje sredstava samo kroz ruralni razvoj. Tako se novim Zakonom i Statutom Savjetodavne službe od 7. veljače 2014. god., odnosni zadaci glede privatnih šuma ponovo uzimaju iz ruku Hrvatskih šuma d.o.o., uz upitnu učinkovitost prema spomenutim izvješćima s terena.Nesređene zemljišne knjige, od čega država neprestano bježi, iako gotovo sve očekivane investicije i razvoj ovise o njihovom uređenju, mali šumoposjedi, nesklonost (osim nekih izuzetaka) šumoposjednika i slaba pomoć države glede potrebe udruživanja koje bi osiguralo suvislu površinu šuma za racionalno gospodarenje po načelu idealnog dijela, uzrokom su kaotičnog stanja. Uzaludna je izrada planova gospodarenja privatnim šumama, kada se ono svodi na razinu čestice, ma kako ona velika/mala bila. Udruživanje u zadruge kao u EU, omogućilo bi zapošljavanje šumarskih stručnjaka koji bi u ime šumoposjednika vodili gospodarenje u duhu ZOŠ-a i bili odgovorni partneri Savjetodavnoj službi i resornom ministarstvu. Sada po svemu sudeći tih spona nema i pitanje je da li ozakonjeni sustav može uspješno funkcionirati.UredništvoThis column has frequently viewed the condition and methods of state forest management from a variety of aspects. This year, when we celebrate the 250th anniversary of Croatian forestry, we record upward and downward trends in the past period, which have generally been influenced by the political situation. After about 50 years of a significantly rising trend, the past several years have witnessed stagnation and then a downward trend. The reasons for this is the irresponsible abandonment of the principle of sustainable management and the comprehensive use and management with the forest as a renewable resource and a highly complex ecosystem, and the comparison of a forest to a factory plant.State owned forests (about 78 %) are managed by the company Hrvatske Šume Ltd. What about private forests, however? Naturally, they are managed by private forest owners. According to the Forest Law, these forests should be managed in the same way as state forests. Article 8 of the Forest Law states that the Company, but also the forest owners, are obliged to manage forests by sustaining and advancing biological and landscape diversity and by taking care to protect the forest ecosystem. Among the 12 items, one states that tending and cutting a forest should be performed in such a way as not to inflict permanent damage to the ecosystem ... Under Article 9, all forest owners have a duty to manage their forests in accordance with management plans ... Article 10 stipulates that all those concerned should repair the damage from devastation, illegal felling or clearing of forests. What we would particularly like to point out is contained in Article 13 of the Forest Law, which says that the timber felled in the forest and outside the forest, as well as other forest products, may be extracted from the forest only if they are adequately marked and if they are accompanied by adequate documents. Do private forest owners observe the Forest Law, who controls this and in what way? More recently, there have been almost daily reports from the field of uncontrolled felling actions, one might even say ruthless „pillages“ of private forests. Who is in charge of marking trees for felling and are the trees marked at all, who classifies the assortments and where do dubious labels on the assortments come from, how and with what documents are the assortments exported and finally, can all this function so well without some shady deals being made? Do certain private forest owners take advantage of the difficult economic situation, on their own accord or under someone´s coercion, believing that everything is allowed in a problem situation, while quasi entrepreneurs are becoming obscenely rich? Even if an action is undertaken to stop this, we have to wonder if the whole thing will end in the same way in which the action against the theft of gravel ended?Otherwise, forest management plans have so far been approved by the Ministry on the proposal of the company Hrvatske Šume Ltd, but now this is done by the Advisory Service for Private Forests. We say now, because until 2006 all services in private forests were approved and generally well performed by the state company (Forest Entrepreneurship, Public Company Hrvatske Šume, and then Hrvatske Šume Ltd). The care of private forests was entrusted to forest experts and smaller departments. As early as 2003, the European Union passed a number of declarations, conventions and directives aimed at supporting rural development and highlighted the importance of private forests in terms of sustainable development. About 40 % of the subsidies related to forestry. This was the main incentive for the Government of the Republic of Croatia, on the basis of the Forest Law (OG 140/05), to pass a Directive on 2nd July 2006 concerning the establishment of the Forest Advisory Service with public jurisdiction. The Service was, however, abolished in 2010 due to financial reasons (it was considered parallel (double) cost), and the affairs were returned to the company Hrvatske Šume Ltd. On November 14th, 2013, the Croatian Parliament discussed a Proposal on changes and amendments to the Law on the Agricultural Advisory Service, and the competent Minister explained why the changes were necessary (the use of EU funds for rural development as early as 2014), as well as the reasons for changing the name and for the urgent procedure. Thus, according to the new Law on the Advisory Service, forestry was „engulfed“ in the somewhat changed and amended Agricultural Advisory Service, now under the general name of „Advisory Service“. This service is a specialized public institution for advisory affairs in the field of agriculture, rural development, fishing and improvement of management of privately owned forests and forestland. It acts through the central office and its branch offices (21). As seen from above, forestry has once again been excluded from the name and placed at the end of the sentence as an afterthought, because our „highly capable“ negotiators with the EU forgot that Croatian forestry with almost 80 % of state forests is not just one little part of agriculture as it is in the EU. Damage is now being compensated by drawing the means only through rural development. The new Law and Statute of 27th February 2014 again took the jobs related to private forests from the hands of the company Hrvatske Šume Ltd. According to the reports from the field, the efficiency is questionable, to say the least.Disorderly land registers, the organisation of which the state continuously shuns despite the fact that almost all the expected investments and development depend on their settlement, small private forest holdings, the unwillingness of private forest owners (with a few exceptions) combined with insufficient help by the state to merge, which would ensure coherent forest areas for rational management according to the principle of the ideal share, are the causes of the chaotic situation. In vain are management plans for private forests when these forests are reduced to a cadaster plot, however big/small it may be. Merging into cooperatives, like in the EU, would make it possible to employ forest experts who would manage forests in the name of private forest owners according to the Forest Law and who would be the responsible partners of the Advisory Service and the competent Ministry. Judging by the current situation, there are no such integrations and the question is whether the legalized system can function successfully.Editorial Boar