The final decision on the matter is set to be made in the autumn by the Estonian Supreme Court, which should clarify whether current practices will be changed or not.

Head of the Ministry of Climate's Biodiversity Protection Department, Timo Kark, said overall the ECJ considered the suspension of logging to be justified.

"In the opinion of the European Court, the birds directive must be interpreted such that its provisions apply to all bird species, including those that are not protected. So any activity that may result in birds being killed, such as logging during the spring-summer nesting period, can be suspended," Kark said.

However, Indrek Veso, lawyer representing Jõgeva-based forestry firm Voore Mets OÜ, at the center of the current case, said that the second point of the ECJ's decision clearly stated that logging during the nesting season is considered intentional killing of birds, destruction of nests, and disturbance of birds only if it takes place in a forest where approximately 10 pairs of birds are found nesting per hectare, or if the disturbance significantly affects the satisfactory status of that bird species.

This means, in his opinion, it is no longer justified to suspend logging in forests if scientific data and observations reveal that fewer than approximately ten pairs per hectare are nesting.

Veso noted: "In recent years, the Environmental Board has created a traffic-light system. And in 'red' forests, they have said these are older forests, classified according to site types. And in 'red' forests, six or more pairs of birds nest per hectare. Therefore, the current practice of the Environmental Board, as I understand it, based on this European Court decision, is disproportionate and overblown."

The ECJ does not give assessments or make decisions on a specific case, but provides its position on the basis of the interpretation of the directive. The final decision is still to be made by the Estonian Supreme Court.

Kark said that the Supreme Court decision must be awaited, meaning the state is not in a hurry to act before that. "Our position is that the Environmental Board's practice today is correct and does not need to be changed. This makes it sensible to wait for the Supreme Court's decision, to see how the Supreme Court will use the input given by the European Court. If everyone understood it the same way, this legal dispute would not even exist," he said.

The ongoing legal dispute began when, in 2021, the Environmental Board (Keskonnaamet) suspended logging by Voore Mets OÜ and Lemeks Põlva AS for an initial five-day period, later extending the ban through to midsummer. The board justified the ban on the basis that the work posed a real risk of disturbing bird nesting or destroying bird nests.

The companies filed a complaint in court, and the Supreme Court referred the matter to the ECJ for interpretation of the provisions of the Birds Directive.

The process will now continue to allow the parties to the proceedings to formulate their positions and submit them to the Supreme Court by the start of September, with a decision due from the Tartu-based court this fall. Whether and how Estonia's current practice should be changed will be discussed after this ruling.

--

Follow ERR News on Facebook and X and never miss an update!