Taipalsaari bans clear-cutting within 30 metres of Saimaa shores
Thursday 17th September 2026 on 19:30 in
Finland
Taipalsaari municipality has banned clear-cutting within 30 metres of the shores of Lake Saimaa, Yle reports. Environmental organisations support the decision and want similar restrictions adopted elsewhere, while the South Karelia Forest Management Association warns of significant losses for forest owners.
Forest company Tornator opposes the 30-metre restriction and has appealed it to an administrative court. The municipality introduced the ban during a planning update in the summer.
Greenpeace forest campaigner Matti Liimatainen said Tornator’s clear-cutting operations appeared to be among the largest in Finland.
“Thirty metres is a small matter, and appealing against it shows an unreasonable attitude,” Liimatainen said.
The usual recommendation is to leave a strip of about 10 metres along the shoreline untouched during logging.
The Finnish Association for Nature Conservation and Greenpeace hope Taipalsaari’s 30-metre ban on clear-cutting along the shores of Greater Saimaa will become more widespread in Finland. They said the protected strip could be even wider.
“Today, 50 metres is not much. Widening the strip would benefit both biodiversity and water protection,” said Tapani Veistola, director general of the Finnish Association for Nature Conservation.
The organisations said a ban on clear-cutting should also be included in legislation to strengthen the protection of existing shore forests.
The South Karelia Forest Management Association opposes extending the protected strip to 30 metres. Its director, Juho Luumi, said the change could have significant financial effects on small forest holdings in the region and called for case-by-case consideration.
According to Luumi, extending the strip could mean a loss of almost 10,000 euros in logging income in the worst case over a 100-metre-long stretch.
Luumi described wide protected strips as an example of “grey protection”, in which land use is restricted through planning without a clear basis in law.
“Financial compensation would certainly make wide protected strips more acceptable. Unfortunately, there is currently no compensation in sight, so the financial effects would fall directly on forest owners,” Luumi said.