Natura 2000

1
Natura 2000 Finnish experiences

• Seppo Vuolanto
• Phare Twinning N2000 project
• Ministry of the Environment, FIN

2
Public hearing about N2000

• All material for public in all concerned
  municipalities for 4 weeks
• no of sites in Natura 2000 proposal
• 1528
• percentage of national territory in N2000 about
  13

3
Public reaction

• Newspapers, TV and radio more false propaganda
  about directives than true information
• Administration weak dissemination of
  information
• advice by an expert consultative company of
  public relations do not react

4
Result of the public hearing

• Number of remarks to the administration
• 13 600
• Group of ministers in the Government to deal with
  the remarks
• Another public hearing
• still 6000 remarks

5
Complaints

• Number of complaints to the Highest
  Administrative Court
• 1600
• representing 5000 persons,
• targeting to 750 proposed N2000 areas
• Largest court procedure ever in Finland

6
Written motivations in complaints

• EU directives do not demand taking my land
  parcel into the Natura Network
• Too much nature conservation already before EU
  membership
• In choosing areas social and economic factors
  are more relevant
• construction of roads,
• mining activities and
• tourism

7
General beliefs

• Finland looses independent right to make
  decisions
• Brussels will decide about land use
• Fear of total conservation not allowed even to
  penetrate onto Natura 2000 sites

8
The logic of the directives in N2000

• While choosing areas - use scientific criteria
• Include all important areas of EU interest into
  N2000
• While using areas - assess the impact of the
  measures into the conservation objects
• social and economic factors may be relevant
• study alternative solutions

9
Judgement by the national court

• Number of approved rejection demands
• 8 areas were rejected not important in EU
  connection
• 40 areas reduction of areas of sites

10
Judgement by the national court

• New areas to N2000 (NGOs demands)
• 25 000 ha important in EU connection
• not included in the proposal by the Ministry

11
Present state of affairs

• After 10 years of membership
• LIFE projects 1995-2004 in Finland
• 31 Mill for about 100 Natura sites
• management plans
• nature restoration
• nature tourism
• employment opportunities etc.
• Other EU co-funded projects
• Nature centres for National parks
• agri-environmental support for farmers

12
Change of public opinion

• General beliefs about N2000 - not true
• Good examples of projects in media
• local media important
• Result (examples)
• Municipalities demand more national parks
• Governor of Lapland considers N2000 as useful

13
Summary

• Natura 2000 canalized massive EU resistance in
  Finland
• Conservation authorities were not able to change
  public opinion
• result political atmosphere against conservation
• Good examples about LIFE and other EU co-finance
  have changed opinion
• Some individuals still continue to resist