Authority fails to inspect frozen cottage plot after logging dispute

Finland’s Permit and Supervisory Authority has not inspected a cottage plot in Pälkäne that froze after clear-cutting on a neighbouring property, despite promising to visit, Yle reports. The authority says current legislation gives it no power to issue orders or sanctions over clear-cutting near small water bodies.

Miia Jatuli contacted the authority in February after a 150-square-metre area of her plot on the shore of Lake Kukkiajärvi froze. The ice was locally up to half a metre thick, and her cottage was also damaged.

Jatuli believes logging by the forestry company Versowood caused the freezing. She suspects logging debris left in a water channel blocked a natural stream, causing water to flood her property. Versowood denies that the clear-cutting caused the ice and believes the reason was paannejää, an ice formation that became common last winter.

The authority promised to inspect the property, but no inspection had taken place by August. Elina Häikiö, a water management specialist at the authority, said the case had been left unresolved during the winter and was later buried under other matters. The authority has no information about the stream’s current condition.

Authority cannot impose sanctions

Häikiö said the authority cannot intervene in clear-cutting carried out near small water bodies. The only significant regulatory system is voluntary forest certification, which requires an unmodified buffer zone of at least five metres beside small water bodies. Häikiö said that distance is insufficient and that a buffer zone of at least 30 metres would be needed to avoid impacts on water systems.

The authority’s official responsible for supervising the Water Act cannot issue orders or sanctions even if clear-cutting causes damage to a neighbouring property. The authority can provide administrative guidance and advice, but it does not issue decisions that can be appealed.

“This Pälkäne case is more of a dispute between two parties. In practice, it has to be taken to court,” Häikiö said.

If the case involved serious environmental degradation, the authority could ask the police to investigate.

The Water Act prohibits endangering the natural state of a small natural channel known as a noro. However, this applies only to physically altering the channel, for example by digging, damming or clearing it. Under the law, a stream is defined as having a catchment area of more than 10 square kilometres, while a noro has a smaller catchment area. A ditch is an artificial channel dug by people.

Dispute over whether channel is natural

A central question in Jatuli’s case is whether the channel is a natural watercourse or a ditch dug by people. Versowood says it served as a field drainage ditch until the 1980s.

Based on map analysis and the catchment area, Häikiö said the channel was probably a noro. Its catchment area is approximately 45 hectares. A noro is usually a seasonally dry channel where water does not always flow and fish cannot pass.

Upstream from the clear-cut area on the shore of Lake Kukkiajärvi is a site protected under the Forest Act. It forms part of the small water body’s immediate surroundings, including the forest along its edge. Häikiö said the forestry operator might therefore have examined whether the channel was a natural noro.

Häikiö acknowledged that the authority has no impartial information about the channel’s natural state before the logging. Jatuli also has few earlier photographs of the area.

A clear-cut can increase surface runoff when trees are removed, bringing more water onto the property, according to Häikiö. The report also says that Lake Kukkiajärvi has become darker.

Jussi Alanko, who owns a cottage on the opposite side of the lake, said he had filed a criminal report alleging an environmental offence connected with the logging. The police in Central Finland confirmed that it had received such a report.