Small 
  Private 
  Forestry 
  in 
  Finland  
2016 
  Learning 
  Tour 
  Summary 
  Report  
H.  Alexander,  Dr.  M.  Hobbs  P.Eng.  RPF,  P.  Burchill  RPF,  J.  Crooker,  J.  MacDougall  RPF  
  

  

  

Sponsors  
The  Forestry  Lab  (A  joint  project  of  NS  Woodlot  Owners  &  Operators  Association  [NSWOOA]  &  ACOA)  
Port  Hawkesbury  Paper  (PHP)  
Federation  of  Nova  Scotia  Woodland  Owners  (FNSWO)  
NS  Landowners  &  Forest  Fibre  Producers  Association  (NSLFFPA)  
  

   

T A B L E    O F    C O N T E N T S   
F OREW ORD   ..........................................................................  i ii   
E XECUTIVE   S UM M ARY     ..............................................................  v   
1.0    I NTRODUCTION   . ................................................................  1  
1 . 1    L E A R N I N G    T O U R    P A R T I C I P A N T S    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   1   
1 . 2    L E A R N I N G    T O U R    R O U T    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   1   

2.0    F ORESTRY  IN   F INLAND   —    T HE   B IG   P ICTURE     . ..............................  3  
2 . 1    F O R E S T    C O V E R   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3   
2 . 2    F O R E S T    O W N E R S H I P    S T R U C T U R E   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3   
2 . 3    F O R E S T    M A N A G E M E N T    A P P R O A C H   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4   
2 . 4    R O U N D W O O D    M A R K E T S   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6   
2 . 5    N A T I O N A L    F O R E S T    E C O N O M Y   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8   
2 . 6    N A T I O N A L    F O R E S T    P O L I C Y :    S T R A T E G Y    A N D    L A W   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9   

3 . 0    P R I V A T E    F O R E S T    L A N D    M A N A G E M E N T    I N    F I N L A N D   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   1 6   
3 . 1    M T K   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   1 6   
3 . 2    I N T E N S I V E    S U S T A I N A B L E    F O R E S T    M A N A G E M E N T   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2 0   

4.0    A    C OM PARISON  OF  THE   S M ALL   P RIVATE   F OREST   S ECTOR  IN     
                 F INLAND  AND   N OVA   S COTIA   . ..............................................   23  
5.0    C ONCLUSION  AND   R ECOM M ENDATIONS  FOR   A CTION  IN     
               N OVA   S COTIA   ................................................................   27  
5 . 1    N E X T    S T E P S   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2 8   

A PPENDICES   .......................................................................   30  
A P P E N D I X    1    –    F I N L A N D    L E A R N I N G    T O U R    I T I N E R A R Y   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3 0   
A P P E N D I X    2    –    G E N E R A L    O V E R V I E W    O F    F I N L A N D ’ S    F O R E S T      
                                                                     E C O L O G Y   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3 1   
A P P E N D I X    3    –    F O R E S T R Y    E D U C A T I O N    I N    F I N L A N D   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3 3   
A P P E N D I X    4    –    T Y P I C A L    F O R E S T    M A N A G E M E N T    R E G I M E    I N    F I N L A N D ,   
                                                                     I N V E S T M E N T S    A N D    C O S T    R E C O V E R Y      . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    3 6   

R EFERENCES   .......................................................................   38  
  

  

i  
  

 L I S T    O F    T A B L E S      
T ABLE   1.    L AND  BASE  AND  OWNERSHIP  COMPARISON  OF   F INLAND  AND   NS      
4  
T ABLE   2.    T YPICAL   F OREST   M ANAGEMENT   T REATMENT   R EGIME  IN   F INLAND     
5  
T ABLE   3.    T REATMENT  SCHEDULE  COST  AND  REVENUES  OVER  THE  FULL  TREATMENT  ROTATION      5  
T ABLE   4.    T OTAL   H ARVEST  OF   L OGS ,    P ULPWOOD  AND   E NERGYWOOD  IN   F INLAND ,    2015      
7  
T ABLE   5.    F INLAND ’ S   F OREST   B ASED   M ARKETS  AND   V ALUE  TO  THE   C OUNTRY     
9  
T ABLE   6.    C OMPARING  THE   P OHJOIS –S AVO   R EGION  OF   F INLAND  TO  THE   S EVEN     
W ESTERN   C OUNTIES  OF   N OVA   S COTIA     
18      
T ABLE   7.    A VERAGE   F OREST   O WNER   I N   P OHJOIS -­‐S AVO   R EGION  OF   F INLAND     
21  
T ABLE   8.    S TUMPAGE   E ARNINGS       
22  
T ABLE   9.    C OMPARING  THE   S MALL   P RIVATE   F OREST   S ECTORS  OF   F INLAND     
AND   N OVA   S COTIA     
23-­‐26  
T ABLE   10.    P ROTECTED   L AND  IN   F INLAND     
32  
T ABLE   11.    F OREST   I NVESTMENT  COSTS ,   ADMINISTRATION  COSTS  AND  STUMPAGE     
REVENUES ,    2015        
36  
T ABLE   12.    A VERAGE  STUMPAGE  RATES  BY  PRODUCT ,    2015        
37   

L I S T    O F    F I G U R E S   
F IGURE   1.    C OMPARISON  OF   F OREST   O WNERSHIP  AND   W OOD   S UPPLY   

4  

F IGURE   2.    N ATIONAL  ANNUAL  GROWING  STOCK  VOLUME  CHANGE   (‘I NCREMENT ’)      
VS .   HARVEST  VOLUME   (‘D RAIN ’),    1900-­‐2014.      

6  

F IGURE   3.    M AP  OF  BIOENERGY  FACILITIES  IN   F INLAND  IN   2016      

11  

F IGURE   4.    V OLUMES  OF   W OOD   F UELS   C ONSUMED  FOR   E NERGY   U SE  IN     
F INLAND ,    2000-­‐2015      

12  

F IGURE   5.    T HE  ORGANIZATIONAL  SUPPORT  STRUCTURES  FOR  SMALL  PRIVATE  FOREST     
OWNERS  IN   F INLAND       

17  

F IGURE   6.    T HE   O RGANIZATION  OF   MTK    (2011)      

17  

F IGURE   7.    F IVE  GEOGRAPHIC  REGIONS  COVERED  BY  THE   F INNISH   G OVERNMENT ’ S     
R EGIONAL   F OREST   C ENTRES       

19  

F IGURE   8.    T WO  SERVICE  DELIVERY  AREAS  OF   F INNISH   G OVERNMENT ’ S   R EGIONAL     
F OREST   C ENTRES       

19  

F IGURE   9.    O PERATING  PROFIT ,   PER  HECTARE ,    1991-­‐2015        

22  

F IGURE   10.    A VERAGE  STUMPAGE  RATES  PAID  IN   F INLAND  BY  PRODUCT ,    2015        

37   

  
ii  
  

 F O R E W O R D   
There 
  has 
  been 
  wide 
  recognition 
  recently 
  that 
  rural 
  economies 
  throughout 
  the 
  province 
  of 
  Nova 
  Scotia 
  
are 
  in 
  deep 
  decline 
  and 
  indeed 
  their 
  survival 
  is 
  uncertain. 
  In 
  February 
  2014, 
  the 
  report 
  from 
  the 
  Nova 
  
Scotia 
  Commission 
  on 
  Building 
  Our 
  New 
  Economy 
  (ONE 
  Nova 
  Scotia), 
  entitled 
  Now 
  or 
  Never: 
  An 
  Urgent 
  
Call 
  to 
  Action 
  for 
  Nova 
  Scotians, 
  stated, 
  “Alarms 
  continue 
  to 
  be 
  sounded; 
  almost 
  every 
  week 
  there 
  are 
  
additional 
  voices 
  in 
  the 
  media 
  and 
  other 
  public 
  forums 
  expressing 
  serious 
  concerns 
  about 
  industry 
  
failures, 
  slow 
  business 
  growth, 
  faltering 
  employment 
  levels, 
  the 
  loss 
  of 
  young 
  people 
  and 
  skilled 
  workers 
  
to 
  other 
  provinces, 
  and 
  the 
  shrinking 
  viability 
  of 
  many 
  rural 
  communities.”1 
  The 
  ONE 
  Commission 
  
consulted 
  with 
  a 
  lot 
  of 
  Nova 
  Scotians 
  in 
  community 
  meetings 
  and 
  concluded 
  that 
  the 
  situation 
  is 
  more 
  
to 
  do 
  with 
  our 
  attitude 
  and 
  culture. 
  The 
  Commission 
  stated 
  there 
  are 
  problems 
  with 
  isolation, 
  
competition 
  and 
  conflict 
  in 
  Nova 
  Scotia 
  and 
  the 
  way 
  to 
  overcome 
  them 
  is 
  through 
  dialogue, 
  
collaboration, 
  and 
  co-­‐operation. 
  The 
  report 
  shows 
  that 
  there 
  is 
  a 
  need 
  for 
  fundamental 
  cultural 
  change 
  
in 
  Nova 
  Scotia 
  to 
  produce 
  economic 
  change. 
  
In 
  2015, 
  the 
  Nova 
  Scotia 
  Woodlot 
  Owners 
  and 
  Operators 
  Association 
  (NSWOOA) 
  wrote 
  about 
  similar 
  
challenges 
  and 
  problems 
  of 
  decline 
  in 
  Nova 
  Scotia’s 
  forest 
  sector 
  because 
  of 
  “market 
  pressures, 
  eco-­‐
nomic 
  downturns, 
  mill 
  closures, 
  and 
  supply 
  constraints.”2 
  The 
  scope 
  of 
  challenges 
  is 
  significant 
  enough 
  
that 
  stakeholders 
  and 
  communities 
  of 
  interest 
  must 
  collaborate 
  across 
  their 
  differences 
  to 
  find 
  workable 
  
solutions. 
  Rather 
  than 
  continuing 
  to 
  expect 
  someone 
  else 
  to 
  solve 
  their 
  problems, 
  the 
  NSWOOA, 
  with 
  
financial 
  support 
  from 
  ACOA 
  and 
  the 
  Nova 
  Scotia 
  Department 
  of 
  Natural 
  Resources, 
  initiated 
  the 
  
Forestry 
  Lab, 
  modelled 
  on 
  similar 
  labs 
  in 
  other 
  countries 
  which 
  have 
  been 
  able 
  to 
  become 
  “stable 
  
platforms 
  to 
  support 
  the 
  work 
  of 
  understanding 
  a 
  problem 
  and 
  experimenting 
  to 
  find 
  a 
  solution”.3 
  The 
  
social 
  lab 
  methodology 
  is 
  uniquely 
  designed 
  to 
  offer 
  a 
  process 
  of 
  innovation 
  and 
  transformation. 
   
  
Early 
  in 
  2016 
  the 
  NSWOOA 
  approved 
  funding 
  for 
  a 
  project 
  entitled 
  “Forestry 
  Learning 
  Tour 
  to 
  Finland,” 
  
as 
  one 
  of 
  the 
  prototype 
  projects 
  of 
  the 
  Forestry 
  Lab. 
  Finland 
  was 
  chosen 
  for 
  the 
  tour 
  because 
  of 
  forest 
  
sector 
  similarities 
  to 
  Nova 
  Scotia, 
  having 
  similar 
  land 
  ownership 
  demographics, 
  similar 
  forest 
  growing 
  
conditions 
  and 
  most 
  importantly 
  because 
  Finland 
  is 
  considered 
  a 
  world 
  leader 
  in 
  the 
  successful 
  
management 
  of 
  small 
  private 
  forests. 
  The 
  tour 
  took 
  place 
  in 
  the 
  fall 
  of 
  2016 
  when 
  a 
  group 
  of 
  five 
  
advocates 
  for 
  Nova 
  Scotia 
  woodlot 
  owners 
  went 
  to 
  Finland 
  to 
  observe 
  the 
  organization 
  and 
  
management 
  of 
  small 
  private 
  woodlots. 
  The 
  tour 
  group 
  talked 
  to 
  landowners, 
  teachers, 
  forestry 
  
equipment 
  manufacturers, 
  foresters 
  and 
  government 
  representatives. 
  The 
  members 
  picked 
  up 
  on 
  the 
  
intensity 
  of 
  the 
  atmosphere 
  and 
  after 
  a 
  few 
  days 
  started 
  to 
  call 
  it 
  the 
  Finns’ 
  focus 
  on 
  forestry. 
  Their 
  gaze 
  
is 
  fixed 
  ahead. 
  They 
  anticipate 
  demand 
  with 
  excellent 
  R&D 
  budgets 
  for 
  engineered 
  wood, 
  paperboard, 
  
bioenergy 
  and 
  the 
  emerging 
  bioeconomy 
  markets. 
  They 
  assure 
  supply 
  by 
  making 
  intelligent 
  investments 
  
in 
  woodlot 
  owner 
  support, 
  forest 
  inventory 
  and 
  contractor 
  training. 
  The 
  group 
  met 
  woodlot 
  owners 
  
with 
  a 
  deep 
  connection 
  to 
  their 
  forest 
  who 
  also 
  have 
  business 
  acumen. 
  They 
  invest 
  in 
  silviculture 
  on 
  
their 
  own 
  forest 
  land 
  in 
  order 
  to 
  supplement 
  their 
  future 
  income. 
  They 
  employ 
  others 
  in 
  their 
  forests. 
  It 
  
is 
  their 
  culture. 
  
 
  

 
  

iii  
  

 Like 
  the 
  ONE 
  Nova 
  Scotia 
  Commission, 
  this 
  report 
  from 
  the 
  Finland 
  tour 
  group 
  recognizes 
  the 
  need 
  for 
  a 
  
cultural 
  shift. 
  It 
  is 
  imperative 
  to 
  create 
  a 
  sustainable 
  forest 
  culture 
  in 
  the 
  province 
  that 
  runs 
  as 
  deep 
  and 
  
strong 
  as 
  the 
  forest 
  culture 
  in 
  Finland. 
  The 
  Acadian 
  forest 
  should 
  be 
  celebrated 
  and 
  our 
  forests 
  should 
  
help 
  bring 
  our 
  people 
  sustenance. 
  The 
  prosperity 
  of 
  our 
  rural 
  areas 
  is 
  no 
  mystery: 
  it 
  is 
  tied 
  up 
  in 
  the 
  
standing 
  resource 
  that 
  is 
  our 
  forest. 
  It 
  is 
  as 
  plain 
  as 
  the 
  trees 
  outside 
  your 
  window. 
  
The 
  Finnish 
  focus 
  on 
  forestry 
  can 
  help 
  us 
  imagine 
  a 
  new 
  approach 
  to 
  socio-­‐economic 
  benefits 
  in 
  rural 
  
Nova 
  Scotia. 
  This 
  is 
  the 
  Forestry 
  Learning 
  Tour 
  Group’s 
  vision 
  for 
  small 
  private 
  woodlots. 
  Creating 
  a 
  
forest 
  and 
  wood 
  products 
  industry, 
  rooted 
  in 
  the 
  economic, 
  social 
  and 
  cultural 
  benefits 
  in 
  Nova 
  Scotia 
  
tops 
  our 
  list 
  of 
  five 
  key 
  messages: 
  
1. 
  Culture 
  and 
  attitude: 
  The 
  culture 
  of 
  forestry 
  needs 
  an 
  attitudinal 
  shift 
  from 
  negative 
  to 
  positive. 
  This 
  
group 
  can 
  explain 
  and 
  show 
  that 
  forestry 
  can 
  be 
  a 
  safe 
  economic 
  driver 
  and 
  provides 
  paid 
  employment, 
  
just 
  like 
  any 
  trade. 
  Forestry 
  in 
  Nova 
  Scotia 
  should 
  be 
  a 
  good 
  news 
  story. 
  
2. 
  Strong 
  landowner 
  support 
  network: 
  Like 
  MTK, 
  the 
  Finnish 
  regional 
  and 
  national 
  forestry 
  entity, 
  there 
  
needs 
  to 
  be 
  a 
  single, 
  unified, 
  provincial 
  lobby 
  for 
  woodlot 
  owners 
  in 
  Nova 
  Scotia. 
  With 
  multiple 
  local 
  
offices 
  like 
  Finland’s 
  Forest 
  Management 
  Associations 
  (FMAs), 
  providing 
  forest 
  management 
  advice 
  and 
  
related 
  services 
  to 
  woodlot 
  owners 
  throughout 
  the 
  province, 
  it 
  would 
  be 
  possible 
  to 
  link 
  with 
  farming 
  
interests, 
  as 
  the 
  Finnish 
  lobby 
  has 
  done. 
  
3. 
  Intensive 
  Sustainable 
  Acadian 
  Forest 
  Management: 
  It 
  is 
  necessary 
  to 
  update 
  our 
  Forest 
  Strategy 
  in 
  
Nova 
  Scotia 
  with 
  regional-­‐specific 
  goals 
  for 
  annual 
  roundwood 
  harvests 
  and 
  to 
  intensify 
  sustainable 
  
management 
  efforts 
  to 
  meet 
  these 
  goals. 
  There 
  is 
  an 
  abundant, 
  underutilized 
  standing 
  forest 
  resource 
  
on 
  small 
  private 
  woodlots 
  in 
  Nova 
  Scotia. 
  Finland 
  manages 
  to 
  produce 
  over 
  three 
  times 
  as 
  much 
  annual 
  
wood 
  supply 
  per 
  hectare 
  of 
  forest 
  land 
  than 
  is 
  done 
  in 
  Nova 
  Scotia. 
  The 
  tour 
  group 
  believes 
  there 
  is 
  
significant 
  room 
  for 
  economic 
  growth 
  in 
  Nova 
  Scotia’s 
  forest 
  sector. 
  
4. 
  Intensive 
  Market 
  Development: 
  With 
  a 
  fully 
  integrated 
  forest 
  product 
  value 
  chain 
  that 
  includes 
  
conventional 
  forest 
  products 
  and 
  new 
  products 
  in 
  paper, 
  construction, 
  materials, 
  and 
  the 
  bioeconomy, 
  
like 
  food 
  and 
  pharmaceuticals, 
  there 
  could 
  be 
  market 
  development. 
  Finding 
  low-­‐grade 
  markets, 
  while 
  
leaving 
  enough 
  biomass 
  in 
  the 
  woods 
  would 
  be 
  a 
  first 
  goal. 
  Bioenergy 
  plants 
  for 
  district 
  heat 
  and 
  power 
  
in 
  Finnish 
  towns 
  have 
  created 
  a 
  domestic 
  demand 
  for 
  low-­‐grade 
  wood 
  that 
  is 
  scalable 
  to 
  Nova 
  Scotia 
  
towns. 
  We 
  need 
  regional 
  forest 
  products 
  market 
  development 
  teams 
  to 
  work 
  toward 
  this 
  goal. 
  
5. 
  High-­‐quality 
  Forest 
  Inventory 
  and 
  Information 
  Transfer: 
  Gathering 
  data 
  for 
  a 
  reliable 
  forest 
  
inventory, 
  and 
  implementing 
  IT 
  systems 
  to 
  make 
  the 
  data 
  publicly 
  available 
  and 
  the 
  analysis 
  user 
  
friendly 
  would 
  be 
  a 
  critical 
  help 
  in 
  forest 
  management 
  planning, 
  motivating 
  woodlot 
  owners 
  and 
  
attracting 
  investment. 
  It 
  is 
  necessary 
  to 
  see 
  proof 
  of 
  a 
  guaranteed 
  long-­‐term 
  sustainable 
  wood 
  
supply 
  before 
  attracting 
  investors. 
   
  
 
  
 
  
 
  

iv  
  

 All 
  of 
  this 
  will 
  take 
  a 
  long-­‐term 
  strategy 
  for 
  providing 
  stable 
  investment, 
  a 
  policy 
  framework 
  and 
  regular 
  
consultation 
  with 
  the 
  stakeholders. 
  In 
  2007, 
  the 
  Finns 
  launched 
  a 
  plan 
  to 
  triple 
  the 
  investment 
  in 
  R&D 
  in 
  
forest 
  products 
  by 
  2030, 
  and 
  this 
  long 
  view 
  makes 
  it 
  possible 
  to 
  improve 
  conditions 
  for 
  intensive 
  
sustainable 
  forest 
  management 
  and 
  for 
  intensive 
  market 
  development. 
  When 
  municipal 
  and 
  provincial 
  
governments 
  recognize 
  forestry, 
  they 
  will 
  recognize 
  that 
  a 
  sustainable 
  wood 
  supply, 
  improved 
  
roundwood 
  markets, 
  increased 
  forest 
  products 
  manufacturing, 
  provide 
  economic 
  growth 
  and 
  job 
  
creation. 
   
  
 
  

v  
  

 E X E C U T I V E    S U M M A R Y      
There 
  are 
  social 
  and 
  economic 
  barriers 
  to 
  small 
  private 
  forestry 
  in 
  the 
  Nova 
  Scotia, 
  which 
  the 
  people 
  of 
  
Finland 
  seem 
  to 
  have 
  overcome. 
  From 
  September 
  29 
  to 
  October 
  5, 
  2016, 
  five 
  woodlot 
  representatives 
  
from 
  Nova 
  Scotia 
  travelled 
  to 
  Finland 
  on 
  a 
  learning 
  tour 
  funded 
  by 
  the 
  Forest 
  Lab 
  and 
  by 
  ACOA 
  to 
  study 
  
Finnish 
  woodlot 
  management, 
  marketing 
  and 
  governance. 
  The 
  purpose 
  of 
  the 
  trip 
  was 
  to 
  explore 
  the 
  
question 
  as 
  to 
  why 
  the 
  Finns 
  are 
  so 
  successful 
  in 
  small 
  private 
  forestry 
  in 
  comparison 
  with 
  Nova 
  
Scotians. 
  The 
  goal 
  was 
  to 
  bring 
  back 
  best 
  practices, 
  especially 
  with 
  regard 
  to 
  using 
  or 
  reusing 
  pre-­‐
existing 
  systems 
  and 
  organizations. 
   
  
This 
  report 
  is 
  a 
  summary 
  of 
  the 
  findings 
  from 
  the 
  Forestry 
  Learning 
  Tour. 
  The 
  evidence 
  of 
  a 
  small, 
  self-­‐
sustaining 
  private 
  forestry 
  sector 
  in 
  Finland 
  made 
  the 
  trip 
  very 
  worthwhile 
  because 
  the 
  authors 
  were 
  
able 
  to 
  see 
  best 
  practices 
  that 
  could 
  be 
  applied 
  in 
  Nova 
  Scotia. 
  The 
  tour 
  group 
  noted 
  that 
  the 
  Finnish 
  
government 
  has 
  played 
  a 
  role 
  in 
  achieving 
  conditions 
  where 
  woodlot 
  owners 
  can 
  organize, 
  carry 
  out 
  
silviculture 
  treatments 
  and 
  access 
  domestic 
  and 
  international 
  markets 
  for 
  their 
  wood 
  products, 
  as 
  well 
  
as 
  provide 
  training 
  and 
  education. 
  In 
  this 
  way 
  they 
  have 
  assured 
  both 
  supply 
  and 
  demand 
  for 
  woodlot 
  
owners 
  today. 
   
  
In 
  order 
  to 
  create 
  a 
  fully 
  integrated 
  framework 
  for 
  woodlot 
  owners 
  in 
  Nova 
  Scotia, 
  and 
  to 
  better 
  
manage 
  the 
  resource, 
  the 
  authors 
  have 
  identified 
  five 
  key 
  areas: 
  
1) 
   
   Culture 
  and 
  attitude: 
  Nova 
  Scotian 
  culture 
  around 
  forestry 
  needs 
  to 
  change, 
  starting 
  with 
  
government 
  engagement 
  and 
  encouragement, 
  at 
  the 
  municipal 
  and 
  provincial 
  levels. 
  
2) 
   
   Strong 
  landowner 
  support 
  system: 
  there 
  should 
  be 
  a 
  way 
  to 
  coordinate 
  existing 
  supports 
  for 
  
woodlot 
  owners, 
  give 
  them 
  access 
  to 
  services 
  and 
  formal 
  channels 
  of 
  communication 
  with 
  
government, 
  and 
  a 
  forum 
  for 
  sharing 
  best 
  practices. 
   
  
3) 
   
   Intensive 
  sustainable 
  forest 
  management 
  regime: 
  early 
  and 
  periodic 
  silviculture 
  treatments 
  
have 
  to 
  be 
  built 
  into 
  an 
  expanded 
  silviculture 
  program 
  designed 
  to 
  suit 
  and 
  sustain 
  the 
  health 
  
and 
  structure 
  of 
  the 
  Acadian 
  forest. 
  
4) 
   
   Intensive 
  market 
  development: 
  there 
  is 
  a 
  need 
  for 
  a 
  fully 
  integrated 
  forest 
  product 
  value 
  chain 
  
focused 
  especially 
  on 
  markets 
  for 
  low-­‐grade 
  wood. 
  A 
  bioenergy 
  strategy 
  for 
  the 
  province 
  is 
  
needed 
  immediately. 
  A 
  bioeconomy 
  strategy 
  is 
  also 
  needed 
  for 
  the 
  province 
  to 
  keep 
  pace 
  with 
  
engineered 
  wood 
  products 
  innovation 
  and 
  chemical 
  derivatives 
  over 
  the 
  longer 
  term. 
  
 
   
  
5) 
   
   Quality 
  forest 
  inventory 
  and 
  information 
  sharing: 
  with 
  a 
  reliable 
  forest 
  inventory 
  and 
  good 
  
infrastructure 
  (IT, 
  transportation), 
  the 
  province 
  can 
  attract 
  investors. 
  This 
  will 
  happen 
  when 
  
there 
  is 
  a 
  guaranteed 
  long-­‐term 
  sustainable 
  wood 
  supply. 
   
  
 
  
 
  
vi  
  

 The 
  authors 
  believe 
  that 
  the 
  future 
  of 
  the 
  forest 
  sector 
  depends 
  on 
  a 
  renewed 
  framework, 
  and 
  that 
  
acting 
  on 
  these 
  five 
  main 
  points 
  will 
  begin 
  the 
  process 
  of 
  invigorating 
  the 
  industry. 
  The 
  outcome 
  will 
  add 
  
to 
  the 
  overall 
  health 
  of 
  the 
  rural 
  economy, 
  providing 
  paid 
  labour, 
  and, 
  in 
  addition, 
  giving 
  better 
  
management 
  to 
  the 
  resource. 
  

vii  
  

 1.0    I N T R O D U C T I O N   
Finland 
  is 
  one 
  of 
  the 
  dominant 
  wood-­‐producing 
  nations 
  in 
  Europe. 
  It 
  has 
  been 
  intensively 
  studied 
  over 
  
time 
  because 
  it 
  is 
  a 
  world-­‐renowned 
  model 
  of 
  intensive 
  forest 
  management, 
  in 
  particular 
  for 
  the 
  success 
  
of 
  small 
  private 
  forests. 
  These 
  woodlots 
  currently 
  generate 
  80 
  percent 
  of 
  the 
  supply 
  in 
  a 
  massive 
  forest 
  
industry 
  that 
  generates 
  significant 
  economic 
  benefits 
  for 
  the 
  country, 
  so 
  much 
  so 
  that 
  the 
  Finnish 
  
people 
  consider 
  forests 
  to 
  be 
  their 
  “Green 
  Gold”. 
   
  
 
  The 
  Finns’ 
  success 
  in 
  managing 
  their 
  small 
  woodlots 
  interested 
  a 
  group 
  of 
  Nova 
  Scotia 
  woodlot 
  owner 
  
advocates. 
  From 
  September 
  29 
  to 
  October 
  5, 
  2016, 
  five 
  representatives 
  of 
  the 
  industry 
  participated 
  in 
  a 
  
learning 
  tour 
  of 
  woodlot 
  management, 
  marketing 
  and 
  governance 
  in 
  Finland, 
  gaining 
  insight 
  into 
  the 
  
policies 
  and 
  practices 
  of 
  their 
  Finnish 
  counterparts. 
  The 
  delegation 
  was 
  sponsored 
  by 
  the 
  Forest 
  Lab, 
  a 
  
collaborative 
  research 
  project, 
  with 
  the 
  goal 
  of 
  understanding 
  why 
  this 
  is 
  a 
  vibrant 
  sector 
  in 
  Finland 
  
compared 
  to 
  Nova 
  Scotia, 
  despite 
  a 
  similar 
  forest 
  ownership 
  structure. 
  With 
  the 
  majority 
  of 
  forest 
  land 
  
in 
  small 
  private 
  holdings 
  in 
  both 
  places, 
  it 
  was 
  felt 
  that 
  lessons 
  could 
  be 
  learned 
  from 
  the 
  Finnish 
  model 
  
that 
  would 
  benefit 
  the 
  economy 
  of 
  rural 
  Nova 
  Scotia. 
   
   
   
  
 
  This 
  report 
  is 
  a 
  summary 
  of 
  the 
  findings 
  from 
  the 
  learning 
  tour 
  showing 
  that 
  the 
  Finns 
  have 
  best 
  
practices 
  that 
  can 
  be 
  adopted 
  in 
  Nova 
  Scotia 
  in 
  order 
  to 
  build 
  capacity. 
  This 
  is 
  not 
  a 
  proposal 
  to 
  replicate 
  
the 
  forest 
  management 
  treatment 
  regime 
  in 
  Finland 
  because 
  it 
  is 
  not 
  wholly 
  applicable 
  to 
  our 
  more 
  
complex 
  forest. 
  Reviewing 
  practices, 
  building 
  momentum, 
  and 
  effecting 
  positive 
  social 
  change 
  in 
  rural 
  
Nova 
  Scotia 
  will 
  help 
  set 
  a 
  path 
  towards 
  a 
  gradual 
  improvement 
  in 
  the 
  management 
  of 
  small 
  private 
  
forests. 
   
  

1.1    L EARNING   T OUR   P ARTICIPANTS   
The 
  team 
  of 
  delegates 
  was 
  made 
  up 
  of 
  staff 
  and 
  board 
  members 
  from 
  three 
  provincial 
  woodlot 
  owner 
  
organizations 
  (NSWOOA, 
  FNSWOO 
  and 
  NSLFFPA) 
  and 
  two 
  new 
  regional 
  woodlot 
  service 
  organizations 
  
(Service 
  Areas) 
  being 
  piloted 
  in 
  Cape 
  Breton 
  and 
  western 
  Nova 
  Scotia. 
  They 
  brought 
  a 
  wide 
  range 
  of 
  
experience 
  in 
  private 
  woodlot 
  ownership, 
  entrepreneurship, 
  consulting 
  and 
  extension 
  service 
  delivery 
  to 
  
landowners, 
  as 
  well 
  as 
  knowledge 
  in 
  wood 
  procurement 
  and 
  sales, 
  contracting 
  and 
  sawmilling. 
  
The 
  tour 
  was 
  partly 
  hosted 
  and 
  organized 
  by 
  staff 
  of 
  the 
  Finnish 
  organization 
  MTK, 
  the 
  Central 
  Union 
  of 
  
Agricultural 
  Producers 
  and 
  Forest 
  Owners. 
  It 
  is 
  a 
  service 
  organization 
  for 
  forest 
  owners 
  and 
  farmers 
  and 
  
works 
  regionally 
  and 
  nationally 
  with 
  local 
  Forest 
  Management 
  Associations 
  (FMAs) 
  by 
  representing 
  and 
  
lobbying 
  for 
  the 
  interests 
  of 
  hundreds 
  of 
  thousands 
  of 
  Finnish 
  woodlot 
  owners 
  in 
  national 
  sessions 
  of 
  
government 
  and 
  at 
  the 
  European 
  Union 
  (EU) 
  in 
  Brussels. 
  It 
  is 
  significant 
  that 
  MTK 
  is 
  responsible 
  for 
  
furthering 
  the 
  interests 
  of 
  both 
  farmers 
  and 
  forest 
  owners. 
  

1.2    L EARNING   T OUR   R OUTE   
The 
  tour 
  group 
  travelled 
  north 
  from 
  the 
  MTK 
  office 
  in 
  Helsinki, 
  the 
  nation’s 
  capital, 
  to 
  the 
  city 
  of 
  Kuopio, 
  
in 
  a 
  central 
  forest 
  region 
  called 
  Pohjois-­‐ 
  Savo 
  (also 
  called 
  Northern 
  Savonia 
  or 
  North 
  Savo). 
  Pohjois-­‐ 
  Savo 
  
was 
  selected 
  as 
  a 
  case-­‐study 
  region 
  because 
  it 
  shares 
  some 
  forest 
  and 
  demographic 
  traits 
  with 
  western 
  
Nova 
  Scotia. 
  Within 
  this 
  region 
  there 
  are 
  4 
  FMAs, 
  one 
  of 
  which 
  is 
  located 
  in 
  the 
  Kuopio 
  area 
  called 
  
Metsanhoitoyhydistys. 
  Staff 
  from 
  this 
  FMA 
  and 
  the 
  Pohjois-­‐Savo 
  region 
  hosted 
  the 
  tour 
  group 
  for 
  two 
  
1  
  

 days 
  in 
  the 
  Kuopio 
  area. 
  They 
  provided 
  good 
  insight 
  into 
  the 
  direct 
  services 
  provided 
  to 
  small 
  private 
  
woodlot 
  owners 
  at 
  the 
  local 
  level 
  by 
  the 
  FMA, 
  and 
  organized 
  a 
  visit 
  with 
  a 
  woodlot 
  owner’s 
  family. 
  The 
  
family 
  gave 
  a 
  presentation 
  in 
  their 
  living 
  room 
  on 
  the 
  importance 
  of 
  small 
  private 
  woodlot 
  management 
  
planning, 
  woodlot 
  economics 
  and 
  operational 
  logistics. 
  The 
  delegation 
  was 
  impressed 
  with 
  the 
  family’s 
  
knowledge 
  of 
  the 
  inventory 
  and 
  harvest 
  decisions 
  on 
  their 
  woodlot. 
   
  
The 
  tour 
  consisted 
  of 
  these 
  additional 
  host 
  sites 
  (for 
  dates 
  and 
  durations 
  refer 
  to 
  the 
  itinerary 
  in 
  
Appendix 
  1): 
  
•

•
•

•

Suonenjoki 
  Forest 
  Seedling 
  Nursery 
  and 
  Research 
  Station. 
  The 
  National 
  Research 
  Institute, 
  Luke 
  
(formerly 
  Metla) 
  provided 
  a 
  tour 
  of 
  their 
  tree 
  seedling 
  research 
  facility 
  and 
  staff 
  gave 
  a 
  series 
  of 
  
presentations 
  on 
  current 
  research 
  topics 
  at 
  Luke. 
  
Observation 
  of 
  an 
  outdoor 
  forestry 
  machine-­‐operator 
  training 
  class 
  at 
  one 
  of 
  several 
  vocational 
  
colleges 
  in 
  Finland 
  that 
  provide 
  state-­‐funded 
  training 
  programs, 
  one 
  to 
  three 
  years 
  in 
  length. 
  
Kuopion 
  Energy 
  Oy. 
  A 
  tour 
  of 
  a 
  large 
  420 
  MW 
  bioenergy 
  plant 
  that 
  supplies 
  district 
  heating 
  and 
  
electricity 
  to 
  Kuopio. 
  Managers 
  gave 
  presentations 
  on 
  current 
  trends 
  in 
  Finnish 
  bioenergy 
  
production, 
  consumption, 
  research 
  and 
  market 
  challenges. 
  
Tour 
  of 
  the 
  Ponsse 
  plant. 
  Staff 
  of 
  Ponsse, 
  including 
  one 
  of 
  the 
  four 
  brothers 
  who 
  inherited 
  the 
  
company 
  from 
  their 
  father, 
  provided 
  a 
  plant 
  tour 
  and 
  presentations 
  describing 
  their 
  evolution 
  
from 
  a 
  small-­‐town 
  forestry 
  equipment 
  manufacturer 
  to 
  cutting-­‐edge 
  developers 
  of 
  nimble 
  
equipment 
  and 
  decision 
  support 
  systems 
  software. 
  Their 
  machines 
  and 
  software, 
  and 
  especially 
  
their 
  particular 
  quality 
  of 
  family-­‐oriented 
  customer 
  service, 
  have 
  helped 
  them 
  become 
  a 
  world 
  
leader 
  in 
  cut-­‐to-­‐length 
  harvester 
  and 
  forwarder 
  manufacturing, 
  sales 
  and 
  service. 
  Ponsse 
  also 
  
provided 
  a 
  field 
  visit 
  to 
  a 
  thinning 
  operation 
  to 
  see 
  their 
  latest 
  model, 
  the 
  Ponsse 
  Scorpion 
  
harvester, 
  at 
  work. 
  

The 
  itinerary 
  was 
  varied 
  and 
  gave 
  a 
  cross-­‐section 
  of 
  forest 
  activity 
  in 
  Finland. 
  Importantly, 
  it 
  gave 
  tour 
  
members 
  a 
  basic 
  sense 
  of 
  national 
  vs. 
  regional 
  and 
  local-­‐level, 
  small, 
  private-­‐forest 
  policy 
  and 
  
organization. 
  Upon 
  return 
  to 
  Nova 
  Scotia, 
  tour 
  members 
  did 
  additional 
  research 
  to 
  complete 
  
descriptions 
  of 
  forestry 
  in 
  Finland 
  as 
  a 
  nation 
  (See 
  Section 
  2.0 
  Forestry 
  in 
  Finland 
  – 
  The 
  Big 
  Picture), 
  and, 
  
small 
  private 
  forestry 
  in 
  the 
  rural 
  regions 
  that 
  make 
  up 
  the 
  Finnish 
  countryside 
  (See 
  Section 
  3.0 
  – 
  Private 
  
Forest 
  Land 
  Management 
  in 
  Finland). 
   
  
  

  

2  
  

 2.0    F O R E S T R Y    I N    F I N L A N D    —    T H E    B I G    P I C T U R E   
One 
  outcome 
  of 
  this 
  tour 
  was 
  that 
  the 
  delegation 
  gained 
  insight 
  into 
  how 
  Finnish 
  forestry 
  functions 
  at 
  
the 
  national 
  level. 
  In 
  the 
  following 
  sections 
  the 
  authors 
  share 
  their 
  findings 
  about 
  forest 
  cover, 
  
ownership 
  structure, 
  forest 
  management 
  approach, 
  the 
  country’s 
  current 
  growing 
  stock 
  and 
  wood 
  
supply, 
  forest 
  inventory 
  and 
  information 
  management, 
  forest 
  economy, 
  forest 
  policy, 
  bioenergy 
  
strategy, 
  ecologic 
  concerns, 
  forest 
  certification, 
  carbon 
  management 
  and 
  forestry 
  machine 
  operator 
  
training. 
  

2.1    F OREST   C OVER   
Finland 
  is 
  a 
  land 
  dominated 
  by 
  forests 
  that 
  fall 
  within 
  the 
  Boreal 
  Coniferous 
  Forest 
  Zone 
  of 
  Northern 
  
Europe. 
  The 
  commercial 
  forestry 
  focus 
  is 
  on 
  the 
  three 
  dominant 
  species: 
  Norway 
  spruce 
  (Picea 
  abies), 
  
Scots 
  Pine 
  (Pinus 
  sylvestris) 
  and 
  Silver 
  Birch 
  (Betula 
  spp.). 
   
  
 
  
Finland 
  is 
  a 
  northern 
  country, 
  but 
  the 
  area 
  south 
  of 
  the 
  Arctic 
  Circle 
  benefits 
  from 
  an 
  enhanced 
  growing 
  
climate 
  due 
  to 
  the 
  warm 
  air 
  of 
  the 
  Gulf 
  Stream 
  and 
  relatively 
  low 
  wind 
  exposure. 
  The 
  risk 
  of 
  blowdown 
  
from 
  thinning 
  appears 
  to 
  be 
  lower 
  in 
  Finland 
  than 
  in 
  Nova 
  Scotia. 
  Stem 
  form 
  was 
  also 
  noticeably 
  better 
  
than 
  Nova 
  Scotia, 
  with 
  very 
  straight 
  trees. 
  This 
  may 
  have 
  something 
  to 
  do 
  with 
  the 
  superior 
  genetics 
  of 
  
the 
  seedlings 
  used 
  to 
  reforest 
  after 
  harvest 
  across 
  Finland. 
  In 
  Nova 
  Scotia, 
  exposure 
  to 
  wind 
  from 
  the 
  
open 
  ocean 
  results 
  in 
  problems 
  with 
  tree 
  blowdown 
  and 
  deformity. 
  An 
  overview 
  of 
  Finnish 
  forest 
  
dynamics 
  and 
  ecology 
  is 
  provided 
  in 
  Appendix 
  2. 
  
 
   
  
Finland’s 
  topography 
  is 
  fairly 
  level 
  with 
  low 
  hills 
  and 
  numerous 
  lakes. 
  The 
  topography 
  in 
  Nova 
  Scotia 
  is 
  
more 
  challenging 
  for 
  forestry 
  operations, 
  particularly 
  in 
  central 
  and 
  eastern 
  counties 
  where 
  stream 
  
crossings 
  and 
  hilly 
  slopes 
  limit 
  access. 
   
  

2.2    F OREST   O W NERSHIP   S TRUCTURE   
Forest 
  ownership 
  demographics 
  in 
  Finland 
  are 
  very 
  similar 
  to 
  Nova 
  Scotia, 
  with 
  private 
  small-­‐forest 
  
owners 
  controlling 
  60 
  percent 
  of 
  the 
  forest 
  land. 
  There 
  are 
  346,400 
  private 
  woodlots 
  of 
  at 
  least 
  2 
  
hectares 
  in 
  Finland. 
  There 
  are 
  632,000 
  woodlot 
  owners 
  (if 
  each 
  owner 
  of 
  a 
  shared 
  holding 
  over 
  2 
  
hectares 
  is 
  counted). 
  This 
  means 
  that 
  about 
  13 
  percent 
  of 
  the 
  total 
  population 
  of 
  5 
  million 
  people 
  in 
  
Finland, 
  or, 
  1 
  in 
  every 
  8 
  people, 
  is 
  a 
  woodlot 
  owner. 
  This 
  is 
  a 
  large 
  proportion 
  of 
  the 
  population 
  and 
  it 
  
appears 
  that 
  the 
  majority 
  of 
  landowners 
  are 
  active. 
  The 
  remaining 
  forest 
  area 
  in 
  Finland 
  is 
  predomin-­‐
ately 
  owned 
  either 
  by 
  the 
  government 
  or 
  by 
  large 
  industrial 
  interests. 
  The 
  state 
  owns 
  26 
  percent 
  of 
  
Finnish 
  forests, 
  including 
  13 
  percent 
  which 
  are 
  protected 
  lands. 
  State 
  lands 
  are 
  managed 
  by 
  an 
  agency 
  
called 
  Metsähallitus. 
  
The 
  mandate 
  of 
  the 
  learning 
  tour 
  was 
  to 
  study 
  small 
  private 
  forest 
  land 
  management 
  in 
  Finland, 
  with 
  
very 
  little 
  attention 
  paid  to 
  management 
  of 
  industrial 
  or 
  state 
  lands. 
  Table 
  1 
  and 
  Figure 
  1 
  compare 
  the 
  
breakdown 
  in 
  forest 
  land 
  ownership 
  between 
  Finland 
  and 
  Nova 
  Scotia 
  and 
  relative 
  wood 
  supply 
  
generated 
  by 
  private 
  forests. 
  
 
  

 
  

3  
  

 Table  1.  Land  base  and  ownership  comparison  of  Finland  and  NS  (Source:  M etsähallitus  
and  Nova  Scotia  Department  of  Natural  Resources)  
Region 
  

Total 
  Land 
  
base 
  (ha) 
  

Forested 
  Land 
  
base 
  (ha) 
  
22,820,000 
  

Protected 
  or 
  
Private 
  Land 
  
Strict 
  Reserve* 
   Ownership 
   
  
Land 
  
13% 
  of 
  total 
  
60% 
  of 
  total 
  

Wood 
  Supply 
  
from 
  Private 
  
 
  
80% 
  

Finland 
  

30,000,000 
  

Nova 
  Scotia 
  

5,258,400 
  

4,240,000 
  

14% 
  of 
  total 
  

63% 
  

53% 
  of 
  total 
  

* 
  In 
  Nova 
  Scotia, 
  most 
  of 
  this 
  is 
  Crown 
  Land, 
  which 
  in 
  Finland 
  would 
  be 
  translated 
  as 
  state 
  land. 
  
 
  

Nova 
  ScoUa 
  % 
  Forest 
  Ownership 
  
(2016) 
  

Finland 
  % 
  Ownership 
  (2016) 
  
Protected 
  
Lands 
  
13% 
  
Other 
  
(State, 
  
 
  Industry) 
  
27% 
  

Protected 
  
Lands 
  
14% 
  

Small 
  
Private 
   
  
60% 
  

Other 
  
(Crown, 
  
 
  Industry) 
  
33% 
  

Small 
  
Private 
   
  
53% 
  

 
  

Finland 
  % 
  Wood 
  Supply 
  (2014) 
  
Other 
  
(State, 
   
  
Industry) 
  
20% 
  

Nova 
  ScoUa 
  % 
  Wood 
  Supply 
  
(2014) 
  
Other 
  
(Crown, 
  
Industry) 
  
37% 
  

Small 
  
Private 
   
  
80% 
  

 
  

 
  

 
  

 
  
Figure  1.  Comparison  of  Forest  ownership  and  wood  supply  

Small 
  
Private 
   
  
63% 
  

 
  

2.3    F OREST   M ANAGEMENT   A PPROACH  
  
Finland 
  is 
  historically 
  a 
  forestry 
  nation, 
  with 
  strong 
  forest 
  legislation 
  dating 
  from 
  1886 
  and 
  an 
  intrinsic 
  
forestry 
  culture 
  that 
  runs 
  deep 
  in 
  its 
  people. 
  There 
  were 
  concerns 
  in 
  the 
  1960s 
  and 
  1970s 
  that 
  harvest 
  
levels 
  were 
  exceeding 
  annual 
  forest 
  growth. 
  To 
  correct 
  this, 
  major 
  investments 
  were 
  made 
  in 
  silviculture 
  
by 
  government 
  through 
  the 
  following 
  twenty 
  years. 
  This 
  included 
  site 
  preparation 
  and 
  seedling 
  
management, 
  thinning 
  at 
  intervals 
  to 
  maximize 
  yields 
  over 
  the 
  full 
  rotation 
  and 
  ditching 
  5 
  million 
  
hectares 
  of 
  poorly 
  drained 
  forest 
  land 
  to 
  improve 
  tree 
  growth. 
  The 
  damage 
  of 
  ditching 
  to 
  wetland 
  
ecology 
  has 
  been 
  recognized 
  and 
  has 
  recently 
  been 
  curtailed 
  by 
  the 
  Finnish 
  government. 
   
  

4  
  

 Planting 
  a nd 
  thinning 
  remain 
  the 
  m ainstays 
  o f 
  F innish 
  forest 
  m anagement. 
  T he 
  m ajority 
  o f 
  forests 
  
in 
  F inland 
  today 
  a re 
  o f 
  p lantation 
  o rigin 
  a nd 
  a re 
  thinned 
  s everal 
  times 
  o ver 
  the 
  a verage 
  s tand 
  
rotation 
  o f 
  7 0-­‐100 
  y ears. 
  F or 
  e xample, 
  7 3 
  p ercent 
  o f 
  the 
  6 12,000 
  h ectares 
  o f 
  forest 
  land 
  h arvested 
  
in 
  F inland 
  in 
  2 015 
  w ere 
  m erchantable 
  thinnings. 
   T able 
  2  
  d escribes 
  the 
  typical 
  forest 
  m anagement 
  
treatment 
  regime 
  in 
  F inland 
  c urrently 
  a nd 
  T able 
  3  
  p rovides 
  the 
  e xpenses/revenues 
  a ssociated 
  w ith 
  
each 
  treatment. 
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
      
  
Table  2.  Typical  Forest  M anagement  Treatment  Regime  in  Finland  
Table  3.  Treatment  schedule  cost  and  revenues  over  the  full  treatm ent  rotation  
1. Age  0.  Regeneration  —  Following  harvest,  all  sites  are  regenerated  either  through  planting  
(~65%)  or  direct  seeding  (~35%).  All  cutovers  are  site  prepared  with  machines  through  
mounding  (rich  sites)  or  scarification  (poor  sites).    
2. Age  ~5.  Early  competition  control  —  All  stands  are  manually  or  mechanically  weeded  of  early  
competition  to  favour  planted  or  seeded  regeneration.    
3. Age  ~10-­‐15.  Second  stage  competition  control  —  Depending  on  the  site,  a  second  early  
weeding  is  scheduled  to  reduce  competition  and  allow  ‘free  to  grow’  selected  trees.  
4. Age  ~25-­‐30.  First  merchantable  thinning  —  First  thinning  in  which  the  landowner  receives  
some  stumpage  revenues  and  begins  to  see  a  return  on  their  investment;  primarily  pulp  and  /  
or  bio-­‐energy  wood  (lowest  grade)  are  removed.  
5. Age  ~45  –  65.  Second  merchantable  thinning  —  As  with  the  earlier  thinning,  the  poorest  
quality  trees  are  cut  at  roughly  one-­‐third  removal,  leaving  the  best  quality  trees  growing  for  
the  final  cut.  While  some  logs  are  produced,  most  of  the  product  is  pulp  and  bio-­‐energy  
wood.  On  the  best  sites  there  may  be  a  third  thinning  but  this  does  not  appear  to  be  the  
norm.  
6. Age  ~80-­‐100.  Final  harvest  –  Clearcut.  Most  of  the  wood  harvested  is  logs  which  are  
optimized  to  the  highest  end  value.  This  stage  offers  the  full  economic  return  to  the  
landowner  with  funds  set  aside  for  the  forest  rotation  to  begin  anew  by  planting  or  seeding.    
(Source:  M etsähallitus)    

 
  

  

5  
  

  
  
When 
  travelling 
  the 
  roads 
  o f 
  F inland, 
  it 
  is 
  d ifficult 
  to 
  s ee 
  a ny 
  forest 
  s tands 
  o f 
  a ny 
  a ge 
  that 
  h ave 
  n ot 
  
been 
  thinned. 
  Intensive 
  forest 
  m anagement 
  o f 
  forests 
  for 
  c ommercial 
  u se 
  is 
  c ommonplace. 
  In 
  
Nova 
  S cotia, 
  the 
  o pposite 
  is 
  true, 
  w here 
  intensive 
  forestry 
  is 
  the 
  e xception 
  rather 
  than 
  the 
  rule 
  a nd 
  
seeing 
  thinned 
  s tands 
  a long 
  the 
  roads 
  is 
  a ctually 
  rare. 
  

2 . 3 . 1    C U R R E N T    G R O W I N G    S T O C K    A N D    W O O D    S U P P L Y   
Following 
  more 
  than 
  40 
  years 
  of 
  intensive 
  silviculture 
  shepherded 
  by 
  the 
  government 
  of 
  Finland, 
  the 
  
country 
  is 
  now 
  benefitting 
  from 
  a 
  significant 
  surplus 
  in 
  forest 
  growing 
  stock. 
  The 
  total 
  standing 
  timber 
  in 
  
Finland 
  is 
  2.3 
  billion 
  cubic 
  metres. 
  The 
  annual 
  growth 
  is 
  104.5 
  million 
  cubic 
  metres 
  with 
  a 
  current 
  surplus 
  
growth 
  over 
  annual 
  harvest 
  levels 
  of 
  23 
  million 
  cubic 
  metres 
  per 
  year. 
  Figure 
  2 
  shows 
  how 
  the 
  forest 
  
growing 
  stock 
  increased 
  in 
  Finland 
  from 
  1965 
  to 
  present, 
  while 
  harvest 
  levels 
  also 
  increased 
  during 
  the 
  
same 
  period. 
  These 
  increasing 
  harvest 
  levels 
  coincide 
  with 
  a 
  significant 
  expansion 
  in 
  Finland’s 
  forest 
  
sector 
  since 
  1965. 
  The 
  current 
  excess 
  of 
  annual 
  forest 
  growth 
  over 
  annual 
  harvest 
  gives 
  Finland 
  a 
  huge 
  
advantage 
  in 
  attracting 
  new 
  investment 
  in 
  their 
  forest 
  sector. 
  The 
  very 
  sophisticated 
  forest 
  inventory 
  
information 
  available 
  in 
  Finland 
  enables 
  this 
  enviable 
  situation. 
  

120 
  
100 
  
80 
  
60 
  
40 
  
20 
  
0 
  

1900 
  
1905 
  
1910 
  
1915 
  
1920 
  
1925 
  
1930 
  
1935 
  
1940 
  
1945 
  
1950 
  
1955 
  
1960 
  
1965 
  
1970 
  
1975 
  
1980 
  
1985 
  
1990 
  
1995 
  
2000 
  
2005 
  
2010 
  

million 
  m3 
  

Annual 
  Growing 
  Stock 
  Increment 
  vs. 
  Harvest 
  
Volume 
  Removed 
   
  (million 
  m3), 
  1900-­‐2014 
  

Year 
  
Drain 
  

Increment 
   
  

 
  
Figure  2.  National  annual  growing  stock  volum e  change  (‘Increment’)  vs.  harvest  
volum e  (‘Drain’),  1900-­‐2014.  (Source:  National  Resources  Institute  Finland)  

2.4    R OUNDW OOD   M ARKETS     
Roundwood 
  markets 
  in 
  Finland 
  are 
  expansive 
  and 
  well 
  developed 
  for 
  any 
  of 
  the 
  three 
  major 
  commercial 
  
species, 
  regardless 
  of 
  tree 
  size. 
  All 
  wood 
  fibre 
  harvested 
  in 
  Finland 
  is 
  sorted 
  for 
  the 
  highest 
  end 
  value 
  
and 
  there 
  is 
  a 
  constant 
  effort 
  to 
  improve 
  efficiencies 
  along 
  the 
  full 
  value 
  chain. 
  The 
  effort 
  pays 
  off 
  in 
  the 
  
collective 
  prosperity 
  for 
  woodlot 
  owners 
  (stumpage), 
  harvesting 
  contractors, 
  truckers, 
  industry, 
  and 
  
governments 
  (taxes). 
  Currently, 
  woodlot 
  owners 
  and 
  forestry 
  operators 
  in 
  Nova 
  Scotia 
  are 
  having 
  
difficulty 
  finding 
  and 
  accessing 
  roundwood 
  markets 
  and 
  can 
  only 
  dream 
  about 
  the 
  sheer 
  magnitude 
  of 
  
the 
  roundwood 
  markets 
  for 
  all 
  grades 
  of 
  wood 
  now 
  existing 
  in 
  Finland. 
  Table 
  4 
  shows 
  the 
  breakdown 
  of 
  
the 
  roundwood 
  harvest 
  in 
  Finland 
  for 
  2105, 
  with 
  64 
  percent 
  of 
  the 
  harvest 
  being 
  pulpwood 
  and 
  
energywood. 
  
6  
  

 Table  4.  Total  Harvest  of  Logs,  Pulpwood  and  Energywood  in  Finland,  2015  (Source  :  
Luke  Natura  Resources  Institute,  Finland)  
 
  

Primary 
  Product
Logs
Pulpwood
Energywood
Total 
  Harvest

Harvest 
  (m3)
 
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
  24,873,000
 
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
  33,976,000
 
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
  9,186,000

 
   
   
   
   
   
   
  68,035,000

 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  

In 
  Finland: 
  
1. 
  Highest 
  quality 
  sawlogs 
  of 
  all 
  three 
  major 
  species 
  go 
  to 
  veneer 
  mills. 
  
2. 
  Tree 
  sections 
  (bolts) 
  greater 
  than 
  15 
  cm 
  top 
  diameter, 
  of 
  all 
  three 
  major 
  species, 
  go 
  to 
  sawmills. 
  
3. 
  Bolts 
  with 
  7-­‐15 
  cm 
  tops 
  of 
  all 
  three 
  major 
  species 
  go 
  to 
  pulp, 
  paper 
  or 
  paperboard 
  mills. 
  
4. 
  Remaining 
  small 
  trees 
  and 
  tops, 
  branches 
  and 
  occasionally 
  stumps, 
  go 
  for 
  biomass 
  and 
  are 
  
chipped 
  as 
  fuel, 
  mostly 
  for 
  district 
  bioenergy 
  plants. 
  
The 
  highest 
  value 
  to 
  Finnish 
  forest 
  owners 
  is 
  the 
  log 
  market 
  for 
  the 
  wood 
  products 
  industry, 
  accounting 
  
for 
  43 
  percent 
  of 
  the 
  harvest 
  but 
  three 
  times 
  the 
  stumpage 
  price 
  of 
  pulp. 
   
  

2 . 4 . 1    N A T I O N A L    F O R E S T    I N V E N T O R Y    A N D    I N F O R M A T I O N   
Finland 
  has 
  a 
  comprehensive 
  and 
  continually 
  updated 
  forest 
  inventory. 
  It 
  has 
  the 
  highest 
  proportion 
  of 
  
private 
  land 
  inventoried 
  in 
  the 
  world 
  (10 
  Million 
  ha). 
  The 
  inventory 
  goes 
  back 
  over 
  150 
  years. 
  Early 
  
attempts 
  at 
  resource 
  inventory 
  began 
  in 
  1858, 
  becoming 
  more 
  or 
  less 
  official 
  by 
  the 
  1920s. 
  Satellite 
  
imagery 
  and 
  digital 
  map 
  data 
  were 
  introduced 
  in 
  the 
  early 
  1980s.4 
   
  
 
  Forest 
  growing 
  stock 
  and 
  the 
  annual 
  harvest 
  are 
  rigorously 
  documented. 
  Forest 
  treatments 
  are 
  
registered 
  in 
  advance 
  and 
  all 
  harvest 
  volumes 
  are 
  documented 
  and 
  summarized 
  by 
  product 
  by 
  region. 
   
  
The 
  online 
  availability 
  of 
  data 
  made 
  public 
  from 
  the 
  Finnish 
  Forest 
  Research 
  Institute 
  is 
  remarkable. 
  The 
  
summary 
  information 
  is 
  publicly 
  available 
  online 
  by 
  region 
  through 
  downloadable 
  data 
  files. 
  These 
  are 
  
updated 
  monthly. 
  The 
  MultiSource 
  National 
  Forest 
  Inventory 
  (MSNFI) 
  used 
  in 
  Finland 
  today 
  includes 
  
LiDar 
  (Light 
  Detecting 
  and 
  Ranging) 
  data 
  combined 
  with 
  field 
  inventories 
  and 
  previous 
  technologies 
  for 
  
publicly 
  available 
  forest 
  statistics 
  and 
  thematic 
  maps.5 
  
The 
  forest 
  statistics 
  and 
  other 
  information 
  produced 
  by 
  the 
  MS-­‐NFI 
  are 
  used 
  in 
  the 
  following 
  ways: 
   
  
• Forest 
  policy 
  at 
  national 
  and 
  international 
  levels 
  
• Regional 
  and 
  national 
  forest 
  management 
  planning 
  
• Planning 
  of 
  forest 
  industry 
  investments 
  
• Assessing 
  sustainability 
  of 
  forestry 
  and 
  forest 
  certification 
  
• Evaluation 
  of 
  greenhouse 
  gas 
  emissions 
  and 
  changes 
  in 
  carbon 
  storage 
  
• Research 
  
 
  

7  
  

 The 
  Finns 
  are 
  able 
  to 
  plan 
  because 
  of 
  the 
  wealth 
  of 
  forest 
  inventory 
  data 
  like 
  this, 
  and 
  the 
  open 
  and 
  
frequent 
  information 
  sharing. 
  Obviously, 
  the 
  high 
  quality 
  of 
  Finland’s 
  national 
  forest 
  inventory 
  allows 
  for 
  
accurate 
  sustainable 
  harvest 
  projections 
  and 
  growing 
  stock 
  calculations. 
  The 
  open 
  sharing 
  of 
  high 
  
quality 
  inventory 
  data 
  has 
  led 
  to 
  progressive 
  management 
  planning 
  and 
  really 
  stimulated 
  the 
  use 
  of 
  
forest 
  resources 
  over 
  time. 
  Having 
  accurate 
  wood 
  supply 
  projections 
  also 
  helps 
  to 
  attract 
  foreign 
  
investors. 
   
  

2.5    N ATIONAL   F OREST   E CONOM Y   
Forest 
  products 
  are 
  the 
  number 
  one 
  export 
  from 
  Finland, 
  totalling 
  roughly 
  €11.6 
  billion 
  ($17.5 
  billion 
  
CAD) 
  in 
  2015. 
   
  
Pulp 
  and 
  paper 
  industries 
  account 
  for 
  over 
  80 
  percent 
  of 
  exports 
  and 
  are 
  a 
  main 
  driver 
  of 
  the 
  forest 
  
industry, 
  accounting 
  for 
  $11 
  billion 
  CAD 
  in 
  exports 
  and 
  50 
  percent 
  of 
  the 
  harvest. 
  While 
  most 
  of 
  the 
  
world 
  experienced 
  a 
  decline 
  in 
  pulp 
  and 
  paper 
  production 
  after 
  2008, 
  the 
  Finnish 
  Industry 
  reorganized 
  
by 
  adapting 
  some 
  mills 
  to 
  produce 
  new 
  products 
  like 
  paperboard 
  and 
  by 
  attracting 
  additional 
  pulp 
  mills. 
   
  
The 
  total 
  forest 
  industry 
  production 
  was 
  valued 
  at 
  almost 
  €20 
  billion 
  ($30 
  billion 
  CAD) 
  in 
  2013. 
  The 
  
forest 
  industry 
  accounts 
  for 
  4 
  percent 
  of 
  GDP 
  and 
  160,000 
  direct 
  and 
  indirect 
  jobs 
  in 
  Finland. 
  According 
  
to 
  a 
  2016 
  Gardner 
  Pinfold 
  report 
  for 
  Forests 
  Nova 
  Scotia, 
  the 
  Nova 
  Scotia 
  forest 
  sector 
  generated 
  11,500 
  
total 
  jobs 
  in 
  fiscal 
  2015. 
  This 
  means 
  that 
  Finland 
  currently 
  generates 
  approximately 
  3 
  times 
  as 
  many 
  jobs 
  
per 
  hectare 
  of 
  forest 
  land 
  as 
  Nova 
  Scotia. 
  It 
  is 
  not 
  unreasonable 
  to 
  think 
  that 
  Nova 
  Scotia 
  could 
  add 
  
10,000 
  new 
  jobs 
  in 
  the 
  forest 
  sector 
  over 
  the 
  next 
  several 
  decades 
  with 
  an 
  improved 
  forest 
  strategy 
  and 
  
effort. 
   
  
In 
  2013, 
  there 
  were 
  49 
  pulp, 
  paper 
  and 
  paperboard 
  plants 
  and 
  190 
  large 
  industrial 
  sawmills 
  in 
  Finland. 
  
Domestic 
  roundwood 
  production 
  totaled 
  68 
  million 
  cubic 
  metres 
  in 
  2015. 
  Over 
  9 
  million 
  cubic 
  metres 
  
was 
  consumed 
  in 
  the 
  form 
  of 
  chips 
  from 
  stumps, 
  small 
  trees 
  and 
  logging 
  residues 
  for 
  bioenergy. 
  In 
  Table 
  
5 
  there 
  is 
  also 
  an 
  accounting 
  by 
  agencies 
  like 
  Statistics 
  Finland, 
  the 
  Natural 
  Resources 
  Institute 
  of 
  
Finland 
  and 
  the 
  Bioenergy 
  Association 
  of 
  Finland 
  to 
  track 
  non-­‐timber 
  market 
  values 
  like 
  recreation, 
  
berries 
  and 
  game 
  husbandry 
  specific 
  to 
  Finnish 
  customs 
  and 
  culture. 
  It 
  is 
  telling 
  how 
  the 
  government 
  
values 
  and 
  tracks 
  these 
  small, 
  specialized 
  markets 
  like 
  any 
  other 
  commercial 
  market 
  (Table 
  5). 
  
  

  

8  
  

 Table  5.  Finland’s  Forest  Based  M arkets  and  Value  to  the  Country  (Source:  Statistics  
Finland;  Natural  Resource  Institute  Finland;  Bioenergy  Association  of  Finland;  
*preliminary  data)  
Forest 
  Based 
  Market 
  
Pulp 
  and 
  paper 
  industry, 
  gross 
  value 
  of 
  production 
  
(2012) 
   
  
Wood 
  product 
  industry, 
  gross 
  value 
  of 
  production 
  
(2012) 
  
Stumpage 
  money 
  income, 
  gross 
  
Nature 
  tourism, 
  estimated 
  value 
  added 
  (2011) 
   
  
Forestry, 
  output 
  at 
  basic 
  price* 
  

 
  Value 
  (1000 
  
euros) 
   
  
 
  € 
  12,945,000 
   
  
 
  € 
  5,578,000 
   
  
 
  € 
  1,950,000 
   
  
 
  € 
  1,226,000 
   
  
 
  € 
  4,216,000 
   
  

Energy, 
  garden 
  and 
  environment 
  peat, 
  estimated 
  
total 
  turnover 
  (2012) 
  
Forest 
  chips 
  + 
  fuelwood, 
  value 
  at 
  the 
  place 
  of 
  use 
  

 
  € 
  300,000 
   
  
 
  € 
  361,000 
   
  

Berries, 
  mushrooms 
  and 
  lichen, 
  trade 
  value 
  + 
  
estimate 
  of 
  household 
  use, 
  direct 
  sales 
  and 
  sale 
  in 
  
open-­‐air 
  market 
  places 
  (2012) 
  
Game 
  husbandry, 
  calculated 
  value 
  
Reindeer 
  husbandry, 
  calculated 
  value 
  

 
  € 
  220,000 
   
  
 
  € 
  64,000 
   
  
 
  € 
  15,000 
   
  

The 
  value 
  of 
  recreational 
  use 
  of 
  forests 
  by 
  pricing 
  the 
  visits 
  to 
  forests 
  for 
  outdoor 
  recreation 
  
has 
  been 
  calculated 
  at 
  about 
  1.93 
  billion 
  euros 
  a 
  year. 
  

 
  

2.6    N ATIONAL   F OREST   P OLICY :    S TRATEGY  AND   L AW  
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
    
Finland 
  has 
  a 
  long 
  history 
  of 
  implementing 
  forest 
  policies 
  that 
  anticipate 
  the 
  needs 
  of 
  future 
  generations 
  
because 
  successive 
  governments 
  have 
  understood 
  the 
  significance 
  of 
  the 
  forests 
  and 
  forestry 
  to 
  the 
  
nation’s 
  economy. 
  Finland’s 
  assertive 
  and 
  innovative 
  forest 
  legislation, 
  started 
  in 
  1886, 
  has 
  had 
  a 
  
profound 
  effect 
  on 
  the 
  country’s 
  forestry 
  resource, 
  working 
  on 
  the 
  principle 
  of 
  using 
  the 
  carrot, 
  not 
  the 
  
stick, 
  to 
  motivate 
  people 
  to 
  comply. 
  Consistent 
  with 
  their 
  culture, 
  Finnish 
  forestry 
  laws 
  operate 
  on 
  a 
  
philosophy 
  of 
  co-­‐operation, 
  consensus 
  and 
  incentives. 
   
   
   
  
The 
  Private 
  Forest 
  Act 
  of 
  1928 
  set 
  up 
  a 
  forestry 
  extension 
  service 
  to 
  help 
  small 
  forest 
  owners. 
  Some 
  
innovations 
  of 
  this 
  Act 
  were: 
  
• the 
  requirement 
  to 
  replant 
  after 
  harvesting 
  
• limits 
  on 
  how 
  much 
  land 
  companies 
  can 
  acquire, 
  thus 
  helping 
  maintain 
  the 
  small 
  private 
  
ownership 
  structure 
  
• creation 
  of 
  forestry 
  organizations 
  to 
  supervise 
  and 
  assist 
  private 
  forest 
  owners 
  to 
  meet 
  
requirements 
  under 
  the 
  Act. 
   
  
In 
  the 
  1960s 
  financial 
  subsidies 
  were 
  created 
  as 
  incentives 
  for 
  silviculture, 
  and 
  in 
  1996 
  the 
  Act 
  on 
  the 
  
Financing 
  of 
  Sustainable 
  Private 
  Forestry 
  set 
  out 
  a 
  schedule 
  for 
  grants 
  from 
  government 
  to 
  small 
  forest 
  
owners 
  for 
  government 
  sanctioned 
  silviculture 
  and 
  harvest 
  activities. 
   
  
Finland’s 
  national 
  forest 
  laws 
  and 
  forest 
  strategy 
  were 
  updated 
  in 
  2014-­‐15, 
  giving 
  direction 
  for 
  the 
  
management 
  of 
  the 
  resource 
  until 
  2050.6 
  The 
  intent 
  of 
  the 
  reforms 
  is 
  to 
  promote 
  biodiversity, 
  
9  
  

 profitability, 
  energy 
  wood, 
  and 
  freedom 
  of 
  choice 
  for 
  forest 
  owners. 
  The 
  document 
  states 
  objectives 
  for 
  
the 
  next 
  10 
  to 
  35 
  years. 
  Eleven 
  specific 
  projects 
  were 
  designed 
  to 
  implement 
  the 
  strategy. 
  In 
  addition 
  to 
  
ecological 
  benchmarks, 
  encouraging 
  more 
  uneven-­‐aged 
  forest 
  treatments, 
  silviculture 
  investment 
  
forecasts, 
  carbon 
  sequestration 
  estimates, 
  social 
  benefits 
  and 
  numerous 
  other 
  indicators, 
  there 
  are 
  
stated 
  targets 
  of 
  
•
•
•
•
•

an 
  increase 
  in 
  annual 
  forest 
  growth 
  by 
  10-­‐30 
  percent 
  by 
  2050 
  (from 
  99 
  million 
  to 
  130 
  million 
  
cubic 
  metres 
  per 
  year) 
  
15 
  million 
  cubic 
  metres 
  of 
  forest 
  chips 
  used 
  for 
  solid 
  fuel 
  energy 
  use 
  by 
  2025 
  
public 
  infrastructure 
  funding 
  for 
  secondary 
  private 
  and 
  public 
  roads 
  to 
  support 
  forestry 
  network 
   
  
public 
  infrastructure 
  funding 
  for 
  a 
  railway 
  network 
  that 
  supports 
  timber 
  transportation 
  
an 
  additional 
  15 
  million 
  cubic 
  metres 
  of 
  annual 
  harvest 
  by 
  2025. 
  

Today, 
  in 
  Finland, 
  the 
  portfolio 
  of 
  the 
  Ministry 
  of 
  Agriculture 
  and 
  Forestry 
  is 
  comprehensive. 
  Forestry 
  is 
  
one 
  of 
  twelve 
  files 
  including 
  food, 
  fisheries 
  and 
  rural 
  areas. 
  In 
  addition 
  to 
  five 
  regional 
  Forestry 
  Centres, 
  
the 
  ministry 
  operates 
  the 
  natural 
  resources 
  research 
  institute, 
  Luke 
  (formerly 
  called 
  Metla), 
  and 
  the 
  
state 
  forest 
  enterprise 
  Metsahallitus. 
   
  
The 
  current 
  government 
  is 
  also 
  looking 
  ahead 
  to 
  the 
  new 
  bioeconomy. 
  The 
  Strategic 
  Programme 
  for 
  the 
  
Forest 
  Sector 
  worked 
  in 
  conjunction 
  with 
  the 
  Ministry 
  of 
  Employment 
  and 
  the 
  Economy 
  to 
  get 
  the 
  
market 
  conditions 
  and 
  precursors 
  right 
  by 
  2015 
  for 
  wood 
  products 
  use, 
  exports 
  and 
  the 
  new 
  
bioeconomy. 
  Forestry 
  is 
  part 
  of 
  their 
  ‘green’ 
  bioeconomy 
  strategy, 
  which 
  includes 
  the 
  high-­‐end 
  
refinement 
  of 
  wood 
  fibre 
  into 
  chemicals, 
  pharmaceuticals, 
  cosmetics 
  etc. 
  for 
  export 
  markets. 
   
  
The 
  benefits 
  of 
  these 
  policies 
  and 
  statutes 
  in 
  Finland 
  were 
  very 
  obvious 
  to 
  the 
  Forestry 
  Learning 
  Tour 
  
Group 
  in 
  2016. 
  They 
  include 
  a 
  culturally 
  intact 
  sense 
  of 
  pride 
  in 
  the 
  nation’s 
  forests, 
  as 
  well 
  as 
  
recognizing 
   
  forestry 
  as 
  a 
  major 
  economic 
  driver, 
  and 
  as 
  a 
  result, 
  an 
  incredible 
  forest 
  setting 
  for 
  a 
  people 
  
who 
  vigorously 
  embrace 
  outdoor 
  activities. 
  

2 . 6 . 1    B i o e n e r g y    S t r a t e g y   
The 
  use 
  of 
  wood 
  biomass 
  for 
  generating 
  energy 
  (both 
  heat 
  and 
  electricity) 
  is 
  a 
  growing 
  component 
  of 
  
the 
  forest 
  sector 
  in 
  Finland, 
  and 
  is 
  a 
  high 
  priority 
  for 
  its 
  current 
  government. 
  Through 
  a 
  country-­‐wide 
  
effort 
  in 
  the 
  last 
  decade, 
  the 
  bioenergy 
  share 
  of 
  the 
  heat 
  and 
  electricity 
  generation 
  market 
  in 
  Finland 
  
has 
  increased 
  almost 
  four-­‐fold, 
  from 
  8-­‐9 
  percent 
  ten 
  years 
  ago 
  to 
  30 
  percent 
  today. 
  There 
  are 
  over 
  800 
  
heating 
  and 
  power 
  plants 
  which 
  use 
  wood 
  chips. 
  These 
  range 
  in 
  size 
  from  small 
  (1-­‐4mW) 
  local-­‐level 
  
heating 
  centres 
  to 
  large 
  CHP 
  (Combined 
  Heat 
  and 
  Power) 
  district 
  heating 
  and 
  electricity 
  production 
  
centers 
  which 
  can 
  generate 
  more 
  than 
  400mW 
  (see 
  Figure 
  3). 
   
  
Kuopion 
  Energia, 
  a 
  large 
  combined 
  heat 
  and 
  power 
  plant 
  in 
  Kuopio 
  City, 
  was 
  visited 
  by 
  the 
  forestry 
  tour 
  
group. 
  The 
  plant 
  was 
  located 
  in 
  a 
  residential 
  neighbourhood, 
  beside 
  a 
  lake. 
   
  
Biomass 
  supply 
  can 
  come 
  from 
  thinning 
  and 
  harvest 
  waste 
  or 
  mill 
  residues. 
  Small 
  trees 
  thinned 
  from 
  
young 
  stands 
  and 
  branches, 
  tops, 
  stumps 
  and 
  otherwise 
  unmerchantable 
  stemwood 
  from 
  harvesting 
  
operations. 
  The 
  material 
  is 
  piled 
  on 
  the 
  forest 
  site 
  to 
  dry 
  for 
  one 
  season 
  (six 
  months 
  to 
  a 
  year) 
  then 
  
brought 
  to 
  roadside 
  where 
  it 
  is 
  covered 
  in 
  a 
  tarpaulin 
  for 
  another 
  six 
  months 
  to 
  a 
  year. 
  Then 
  it 
  is 
  chipped 
  
and 
  delivered 
  to 
  a 
  nearby 
  district 
  heating 
  plant 
  or 
  sold 
  into 
  the 
  bioenergy 
  market. 
  The 
  piles 
  are 
  covered 
   
  
10  
  

  

 

 

BIUENERBIAN TUUTTAJAT 2016

BIUPDWER AND HEAT PRODUCERS 201E

 

 

 

3i KUOPION
ENERGIA

Valmet)

FORWARD

 

 
       

a unswu
1n-4aswn
50-45mm 
3
sun-ssaswu
.
METSAHALLITUS
unanswn


   
   
   

Gunpo

BKELENIH Em



sauna
BI 

. 1mm: 
FEAT VANIEMI
nunsxs
FOREST FUELS

TEDLLISUUIJEN 

wnnu RESIDUE. worm .
PUUPELLETIT m?
wnnu PELLETS

. EIDKAASU
moans 
- a?

'8 ENERSTENA
?9

 

 

 

 

PUMMSIHI
vnlmun
nulunenergia?



-KA NI
0 .mpavasl 

 

 

36;? :3va


.- -LAHT 
.. -KHUVULA

 

RANIA

BioEnergia 

   

0N -I.EHTIW 
RY: El" 
ll KUNTILIITDN 

"0 0
0.35.090 0 ti?
.. uunnzu m: uumu.
MAARIANHAM NA . . El 5mm nnammusuunzu 1. Ki?nuvu urnormxum.
HELSINKI DIES FLAME HDIISE HF il??ll 

 

 

 


1:150000

Aumuml ull'rA-milml mm!)

Figure 3. Map of bioenergy facilities in Finland in 2016

 

to 
  aid 
  the 
  drying 
  process 
  and 
  keep 
  snow 
  off, 
  since 
  most 
  forest 
  residues 
  are 
  chipped 
  in 
  winter 
  during 
  
peak 
  heat 
  loads. 
  This 
  biomass 
  is 
  referred 
  to 
  as 
  energy 
  wood 
  in 
  Finland. 
  Significant 
  quantities 
  of 
  biomass 
  
also 
  come 
  from 
  forest 
  industry 
  residues 
  such 
  as 
  bark, 
  sawdust 
  and 
  shavings.  Table 
  4 
  (page 
  7) 
  shows 
  the 
  
volume 
  of 
  energywood 
  produced 
  relative 
  to 
  pulp 
  and 
  roundwood 
  in 
  Finland 
  in 
  2015. 
   
  
 
  
The 
  two 
  main 
  drivers 
  of 
  the 
  recent 
  nationwide 
  growth 
  of 
  the 
  bioenergy 
  industry 
  in 
  Finland 
  are 
  
1. 
   The 
  European 
  Union 
  initiative 
  to 
  cut 
  greenhouse 
  gas 
  emissions 
  by 
  40 
  percent 
  in 
  2030 
  from 
  
1990 
  levels. 
  Burning 
  forest 
  biomass 
  to 
  generate 
  energy 
  is 
  considered 
  to 
  be 
  carbon 
  neutral 
  
compared 
  to 
  burning 
  fossil 
  fuels 
  in 
  Finland. 
  
2. 
   
   The 
  financial 
  benefits 
  to 
  the 
  Finnish 
  economy 
  by 
  improving 
  energy 
  self-­‐sufficiency 
  through 
  
using 
  locally 
  grown 
  and 
  produced 
  forest 
  biomass 
  to 
  replace 
  imported 
  coal 
  from 
  Russia. 
  
 
  
District 
  heating 
  plants 
  provide 
  significant 
  markets 
  for 
  energy 
  wood 
  for 
  the 
  Finnish 
  forest 
  sector. 
  The 
  rise 
  
in 
  the 
  consumption 
  of 
  chips 
  for 
  energy 
  from 
  2000 
  to 
  2015, 
  shown 
  in 
  Figure 
  4, 
  is 
  the 
  result 
  of 
  the 
  effort 
  
to 
  increase 
  the 
  use 
  of 
  low-­‐grade 
  wood 
  from 
  harvest 
  sites 
  for 
  bioenergy. 
  This 
  pays 
  the 
  landowner 
  a 
  small 
   
  
amount 
  (~2 
  € 
  per 
  cubic 
  metre) 
  but 
  it 
  is 
  an 
  important 
  link 
  in 
  the 
  value 
  chain 
  and 
  helps 
  maintain 
  the 
  
domestic 
  market 
  created 
  to 
  meet 
  national 
  energy-­‐use 
  targets. 
  

20000 
  
18000 
  
16000 
  

(1000 
  m3) 
  

14000 
  
12000 
  
10000 
  
8000 
  
6000 
  
4000 
  
2000 
  
0 
  
2000 
  2001 
  2002 
  2003 
  2004 
  2005 
  2006 
  2007 
  2008 
  2009 
  2010 
  2011 
  2012 
  2013 
  2014 
  2015 
  

Year 
  
Forest 
  chips, 
  total 
  

Forest 
  industry 
  by-­‐products, 
  total 
  

Other 
  

Wood 
  fuels, 
  total 
  

Figure  4.  Volumes  of  W ood  Fuels  Consumed  for  Energy  Use  in  Finland,  2000-­‐2015.  
(Source:  Natural  Resources  Institute  Finland,  W ood  in  energy  generation)  
 
  
The 
  domestic 
  bioenergy 
  market 
  for 
  low-­‐grade 
  wood 
  seen 
  in 
  Finland 
  is 
  something 
  that 
  should 
  be 
  
explored 
  for 
  Nova 
  Scotia. 
  Since 
  the 
  closure 
  of 
  the 
  former 
  Bowater 
  Mersey 
  paper 
  mill 
  in 
  Liverpool 
  in 
  
2012, 
  there 
  are 
  no 
  economic 
  low-­‐grade 
  roundwood 
  markets 
  in 
  western 
  Nova 
  Scotia 
  and 
  insufficient 
  
12  
  

 markets 
  throughout 
  the 
  rest 
  of 
  the 
  province. 
  An 
  intelligent 
  and 
  ecologically 
  aware 
  bioenergy 
  program 
  in 
  
the 
  province 
  would 
  create 
  markets 
  for 
  low-­‐grade 
  wood 
  and 
  insure 
  that 
  enough 
  woody 
  debris 
  and 
  
harvest 
  residues 
  on 
  the 
  forest 
  floor 
  are 
  conserved 
  to 
  maintain 
  ecosystem 
  structure, 
  habitat 
  and 
  soil 
  
nutrient 
  cycles. 
  

2 . 6 . 2    E C O L O G I C    C O N C E R N S    I N    F I N L A N D  
  
Major 
  sustainability 
  policy 
  changes 
  were 
  made 
  in 
  the 
  1990s 
  in 
  Finland 
  to 
  reflect 
  concern 
  for 
  the 
  
environment. 
  The 
  current 
  status 
  of 
  forest 
  sustainability 
  in 
  Finland 
  has 
  been 
  explained 
  in 
  the 
  2016 
  
European 
  Union 
  Policy 
  report.7 
  This 
  document 
  is 
  a 
  good 
  source 
  of 
  information 
  for 
  further 
  reading 
  on 
  
current 
  biodiversity 
  and 
  sustainability 
  concerns 
  in 
  Finland 
  today. 
  
Prominent 
  biodiversity 
  concerns 
  raised 
  in 
  Finland 
  today 
  include 
  the 
  following: 
  
• Biodiversity 
  reduction 
  through 
  intensive 
  plantation 
  management 
  
• Decline 
  and 
  under-­‐representation 
  in 
  old 
  growth 
  forest 
  types 
  
• Not 
  leaving 
  enough 
  coarse 
  woody 
  debris 
  for 
  nutrient 
  management 
  and 
  wildlife 
  habitat 
  after 
  the 
  
removal 
  of 
  fuel 
  grade 
  products 
  like 
  unmerchantable 
  wood, 
  branches, 
  tops 
  and 
  stumps 
  from 
  the 
  
harvest 
  site 
  for 
  energy 
  wood. 
  Managed 
  forests 
  currently 
  have 
  about 
  3 
  cubic 
  metres 
  per 
  hectare 
  
of 
  coarse 
  woody 
  debris 
  while 
  natural 
  forests 
  have 
  about 
  100 
  cubic 
  metres 
  per 
  hectare. 
  Also 
  tied 
  
to 
  fuel 
  consumption 
  is 
  the 
  assumed 
  neutrality 
  of 
  the 
  carbon 
  flux 
  over 
  time 
  from 
  burning 
  wood. 
  
This 
  has 
  come 
  under 
  renewed 
  debate 
  in 
  2016/2017. 
  
• Uneven 
  distribution 
  and 
  representation 
  of 
  protected 
  and 
  restricted-­‐use 
  forest. 
  The 
  vast 
  majority 
  
of 
  protected 
  forest 
  areas 
  are 
  in 
  the 
  northern, 
  less 
  productive 
  areas 
  of 
  the 
  country. 
  Efforts 
  are 
  
underway 
  to 
  protect 
  significant 
  or 
  representative 
  forest 
  types, 
  like 
  herb-­‐rich 
  forests, 
  over 
  the 
  
remainder 
  of 
  the 
  country 
  but 
  this 
  remains 
  a 
  challenge 
  considering 
  the 
  high 
  proportion 
  of 
  
privately 
  owned 
  and 
  intensively 
  managed 
  forest. 
   
  
• Pesticide 
  use 
  
Forest 
  certification 
  and 
  carbon 
  management 
  systems 
  have 
  been 
  instituted 
  in 
  Finland 
  as 
  the 
  
understanding 
  of 
  forest 
  ecology 
  and 
  science 
  has 
  improved. 
  

2 . 6 . 2 . 1    F o r e s t    C e r t i f i c a t i o n    i n    F i n l a n d   
Forest 
  certification 
  is 
  widely 
  accepted 
  and 
  practised 
  throughout 
  the 
  whole 
  value 
  chain 
  in 
  Finland. 
  It 
  is 
  a 
  
voluntary, 
  market-­‐based 
  tool 
  that 
  verifies 
  that 
  Finnish 
  forests 
  are 
  managed 
  sustainably. 
  PEFC 
  (Program 
  
for 
  the 
  Endorsement 
  of 
  Forest 
  Certification) 
  is 
  the 
  chosen 
  forest 
  certification 
  model 
  for 
  small 
  or 
  family 
  
forest 
  owners, 
  as 
  well 
  as 
  for 
  large-­‐scale 
  forest 
  owners. 
  PEFC 
  absorbed 
  the 
  original 
  Finnish 
  certification 
  
scheme 
  for 
  private 
  forests 
  and 
  has 
  been 
  in 
  place 
  since 
  1999. 
  The 
  Finns 
  view 
  is 
  that 
  sustainability 
  is 
  for 
  
the 
  whole 
  of 
  society 
  and 
  that 
  for 
  their 
  goals 
  to 
  be 
  reached, 
  everyone 
  needs 
  to 
  do 
  their 
  part: 
  
governments, 
  the 
  private 
  sector 
  and 
  civil 
  society. 
  About 
  90 
  percent 
  of 
  Finnish 
  forests 
  are 
  PEFC 
  certified, 
  
equivalent 
  to 
  about 
  16.5 
  million 
  ha. 
   
  
The 
  Sustainable 
  Forest 
  Management 
  Associations 
  (SFMAs) 
  hold 
  regional 
  PEFC 
  group 
  certificates. 
  In 
  2015 
  
there 
  were 
  13 
  regions 
  and 
  6 
  certificates. 
  Further 
  consolidation 
  to 
  five 
  regions 
  was 
  planned 
  in 
  2016. 
   
  
Individual 
  PEFC 
  certificates 
  exist 
  for 
  forest 
  companies 
  as 
  well, 
  like 
  UPM-­‐Kymmene 
  Oy 
  and 
  for 
  
Metsahallitus 
  (the 
  company 
  that 
  manages 
  state 
  forests.) 
  
13  
  

 Private 
  forest 
  owners 
  who 
  become 
  members 
  of 
  an 
  SFMA 
  will 
  automatically 
  get 
  a 
  PEFC 
  Certified 
  
management 
  plan 
  and 
  become 
  part 
  of 
  the 
  PEFC 
  management 
  system. 
  There 
  is 
  no 
  additional 
  charge 
  to 
  
the 
  forest 
  owner 
  for 
  certification. 
  The 
  cost 
  of 
  certification 
  is 
  paid 
  for 
  by 
  MTK 
  (1/3) 
  and 
  the 
  various 
  forest 
  
companies 
  (2/3). 
  
Forest 
  owners, 
  forest 
  industry, 
  and 
  other 
  entrepreneurs 
  who 
  work 
  in 
  certified 
  forests 
  are 
  required 
  to 
  
follow 
  PEFC 
  criteria. 
  If 
  a 
  forest 
  owner 
  uses 
  a 
  contractor 
  who 
  has 
  not 
  participated 
  in 
  PEFC, 
  the 
  forest 
  
owner 
  is 
  responsible 
  for 
  the 
  PEFC 
  criteria. 
  In 
  standing 
  timber 
  sales, 
  the 
  owner 
  of 
  the 
  harvesting 
  rights 
  is 
  
responsible 
  for 
  the 
  PEFC 
  criteria. 
  Information 
  about 
  PEFC-­‐enrolled 
  companies 
  and 
  entrepreneurs 
  is 
  
updated 
  regularly 
  in 
  a 
  pefc.fi 
  database 
  to 
  verify 
  commitment 
  of 
  subcontractors. 
  Forest 
  owners 
  use 
  the 
  
database 
  to 
  verify 
  the 
  quality 
  of 
  forest 
  service 
  providers. 
  
The 
  Finns 
  believe 
  they 
  have 
  a 
  global 
  responsibility 
  for 
  sustainability 
  and 
  the 
  carrying 
  capacity 
  of 
  nature. 
  
Sustainability 
  is 
  already 
  a 
  traditional 
  procedure 
  and 
  PEFC 
  certification 
  provides 
  a 
  common 
  way 
  for 
  
different 
  actors 
  to 
  improve 
  quality 
  and 
  social, 
  ecological 
  and 
  economic 
  sustainability. 
   
  

2 . 6 . 2 . 2    C a r b o n    M a n a g e m e n t   
The 
  forest 
  carbon 
  cycle 
  in 
  Finland 
  is 
  fairly 
  well 
  researched 
  and 
  inventoried 
  by 
  today’s 
  standards. 
  The 
  
management 
  of 
  the 
  sink 
  and 
  source 
  of 
  carbon 
  dioxide 
  equivalents 
  in 
  Finland 
  is 
  within 
  the 
  context 
  of 
  the 
  
European 
  Union’s 
  targets 
  for 
  regulation 
  and 
  trade. 
  However, 
  there 
  is 
  currently 
  no 
  known 
  carbon 
  trade 
  
market 
  for 
  forest 
  owners 
  in 
  Finland. 
   
  
The 
  national 
  approach 
  appears 
  to 
  be 
  to 
  demonstrate 
  the 
  current 
  and 
  projected 
  sequestration 
  level 
  as 
  a 
  
result 
  of 
  current 
  management 
  practices. 
  These 
  levels 
  are 
  undeniably 
  high 
  relative 
  to 
  the 
  rest 
  of 
  the 
  
Europe 
  and 
  most 
  of 
  the 
  world. 
  This 
  information 
  in 
  turn 
  is 
  lobbied 
  to 
  the 
  EU 
  for 
  policy 
  and 
  regulatory 
  
influence.8 
  Forest 
  management 
  carbon 
  markets 
  fall 
  within 
  a 
  regulatory 
  and/or 
  voluntary 
  jurisdiction. 
  In 
  
both 
  cases, 
  actual 
  carbon 
  credits 
  are 
  eligible 
  through 
  the 
  proven 
  increase 
  of 
  C02e9 
  storage 
  within 
  a 
  
forested 
  land 
  base 
  over 
  time, 
  through 
  a 
  change 
  in 
  forest 
  management 
  over 
  the 
  baseline, 
  or 
  status 
  quo 
  
scenario. 
  This 
  approach 
  would 
  not 
  reward 
  Finnish 
  forest 
  owners 
  as 
  the 
  management 
  practices 
  today 
  
(status 
  quo) 
  already 
  maximize 
  yield. 
   
  

2 . 6 . 3    F O R E S T R Y    I N    F I N L A N D   
The 
  Finns 
  deliberately 
  and 
  with 
  consideration 
  adapt 
  their 
  forestry 
  curricula 
  and 
  professional 
  training 
  to 
  
keep 
  pace 
  with 
  changes 
  in 
  logging 
  equipment, 
  logging 
  electronics 
  and 
  communications, 
  and 
  general 
  
industry 
  organization. 
  While 
  the 
  technological 
  changes 
  are 
  obvious, 
  more 
  subtle 
  is 
  the 
  change 
  in 
  human 
  
organization 
  around 
  forestry 
  work. 
   
  
In 
  1970, 
  industry 
  organized 
  the 
  wood 
  supply 
  and 
  their 
  foremen 
  did 
  site 
  and 
  harvesting 
  planning 
  and 
  
hiring 
  of 
  fleets. 
  In 
  2017, 
  it 
  is 
  the 
  forest 
  machine 
  operators, 
  working 
  for 
  small 
  private 
  harvesting 
  
companies 
  that 
  are 
  responsible 
  for 
  the 
  quality 
  of 
  logging, 
  production 
  report 
  transmission 
  from 
  their 
  
machine 
  to 
  the 
  mill, 
  the 
  maintenance 
  of 
  their 
  machine 
  and 
  identification 
  of 
  habitats. 
  They 
  are 
  therefore 
  
likened 
  to 
  harvest 
  process 
  instructors 
  and 
  managers 
  rather 
  than 
  as 
  rote 
  machine 
  operators. 
  There 
  is 
  a 
  
weight 
  of 
  responsibility 
  and 
  an 
  elevated 
  sense 
  of 
  regard 
  for 
  forest 
  machine 
  operators 
  in 
  Finland. 
  

14  
  

 Vocational 
  Qualifications 
  in 
  Forestry 
  takes 
  3 
  years 
  of 
  schooling 
  during 
  which 
  120 
  credits 
  are 
  
accumulated 
  (See 
  Appendix 
  3). 
  This 
  is 
  equivalent 
  to 
  the 
  European 
  Qualifications 
  Framework 
  (EQF) 
  
system 
  of 
  an 
  EQF 
  Level 
  4. 
  This 
  assures 
  competence 
  to 
  enter 
  employment 
  in 
  the 
  field. 
  
Students 
  graduate 
  with 
  Qualifications 
  in 
  one 
  of 
  these 
  specific 
  occupations: 
  
a) Forest 
  worker 
  
b) Forest 
  machine 
  operator 
  (harvester/ 
  forwarder) 
  
c) Forest 
  mechanic 
  
d) Timber 
  truck 
  driver 
  
Through 
  work 
  experience, 
  also 
  available 
  as 
  apprenticeship 
  training, 
  students 
  can 
  obtain 
  ‘Further 
  
Vocational 
  Qualifications’ 
  to 
  be 
  considered 
  a 
  skilled 
  worker, 
  and 
  ‘Specialist 
  Vocational 
  Qualifications’ 
  to 
  
show 
  they 
  have 
  mastered 
  the 
  most 
  demanding 
  tasks 
  of 
  the 
  job 
  in 
  their 
  field. 
  These 
  levels 
  of 
  training 
  
equate 
  to 
  Europe’s 
  scale 
  as 
  EQF 
  5 
  and 
  EQF 
  5-­‐6. 
  By 
  comparison, 
  a 
  bachelor’s 
  degree 
  in 
  Forestry 
  is 
  EQF 
  6. 
  
Curricula 
  are 
  designed 
  by 
  committees 
  that 
  include 
  employers 
  from 
  industry. 
  This 
  is 
  to 
  keep 
  the 
  lesson 
  
plan 
  for 
  new 
  forest 
  workers 
  practical 
  and 
  relevant. 
  It 
  must 
  be 
  noted 
  that 
  vocational 
  and 
  university 
  
education 
  in 
  Finland 
  is 
  free. 
  
 
  
  

  

15  
  

 3.0    P R I V A T E    F O R E S T    L A N D    M A N A G E M E N T    I N    F I N L A N D      
Small 
  private 
  forests 
  in 
  Finland 
  make 
  up 
  60 
  percent 
  of 
  the 
  forest 
  land 
  base 
  and 
  generate 
  80 
  percent 
  of 
  
the 
  wood 
  used 
  by 
  the 
  forest 
  industry. 
  Forest 
  owners 
  play 
  a 
  very 
  active 
  role 
  in 
  maximizing 
  growth 
  and 
  
yield 
  on 
  their 
  woodlots. 
  While 
  there 
  are 
  some 
  government 
  subsidies 
  and 
  incentives 
  for 
  silviculture, 
  
woodlot 
  owners 
  willingly 
  pay 
  some 
  of 
  the 
  site 
  preparation, 
  planting 
  and 
  weeding 
  costs 
  associated 
  with 
  
early 
  plantation 
  establishment. 
  This 
  is 
  basically 
  returning 
  some 
  of 
  their 
  significant 
  stumpage 
  revenues 
  
from 
  forest 
  harvesting, 
  as 
  an 
  investment 
  in 
  their 
  future 
  forests. 
  The 
  interdependence 
  of 
  woodlot 
  owners 
  
and 
  the 
  economy 
  is 
  well 
  understood 
  in 
  Finland 
  where 
  there 
  is 
  a 
  tremendous 
  amount 
  of 
  cooperation 
  
between 
  woodlot 
  owners, 
  government 
  and 
  industry. 
  
Supports 
  for 
  woodlot 
  owners 
  in 
  Finland 
  consist 
  of 
  government 
  Forest 
  Centres 
  operated 
  by 
  the 
  Ministry 
  
of 
  Agriculture 
  and 
  Forestry, 
  local 
  Forest 
  Management 
  Associations 
  (FMAs) 
  and 
  the 
  Central 
  Union 
  of 
  
Agricultural 
  Producers 
  and 
  Forest 
  Owners 
  called 
  MTK. 
   
  

3.1    MTK  
MTK 
  is 
  a 
  lobbyist 
  for 
  the 
  FMAs, 
  in 
  partnership 
  with 
  industry, 
  to 
  the 
  national 
  government 
  and 
  to 
  the 
  
European 
  Union 
  (EU). 
  The 
  state’s 
  Forest 
  Centres 
  and 
  the 
  FMAs 
  offer 
  regional 
  and 
  local 
  support 
  and 
  
services 
  to 
  small 
  owners 
  throughout 
  Finland. 
  In 
  effect 
  there 
  is 
  support 
  for 
  woodlot 
  owners 
  at 
  all 
  levels 
  
(see 
  Figure 
  5). 
  This 
  has 
  created 
  an 
  ‘enabling 
  environment’ 
  for 
  woodlot 
  owners, 
  defined 
  by 
  MTK 
  as 
  ‘the 
  
right 
  balance 
  of 
  guiding 
  tools, 
  legislation, 
  funding, 
  advice 
  and 
  service 
  providers 
  to 
  reach 
  set 
  goals.’ 
   
  
The 
  Pohjois-­‐Savo 
  region 
  visited 
  on 
  the 
  tour 
  is 
  one 
  of 
  13 
  designated 
  forest 
  regions 
  in 
  Finland 
  where 
  
regional 
  MTK 
  offices 
  serve 
  and 
  represent 
  woodlot 
  owners 
  through 
  the 
  FMAs. 
  In 
  2016 
  MTK 
  had 
  over 
  
400,000 
  members, 
  between 
  farm 
  producers, 
  the 
  forestry 
  FMAs 
  and 
  other 
  rural 
  entrepreneurs, 
  so 
  it 
  is 
  a 
  
powerful 
  lobby 
  that 
  is 
  about 
  to 
  celebrate 
  its 
  100th 
  anniversary. 
  Figure 
  6 
  shows 
  the 
  organizational 
  
structure 
  of 
  MTK 
  in 
  2011. 
  Although 
  the 
  2011 
  numbers 
  are 
  a 
  little 
  dated 
  , 
  it 
  still 
  shows 
  the 
  association 
  
between 
  small-­‐forest 
  owners, 
  farmers 
  and 
  other 
  rural 
  entrepreneurs 
  in 
  Finland, 
  under 
  one 
  umbrella 
  
that 
  is 
  MTK. 
  

3 . 1 . 1    F M A S   
Forest 
  Management 
  Associations 
  (FMAs) 
  are 
  collectives 
  of 
  woodlot 
  owners 
  managing 
  their 
  own 
  forestry 
  
activities. 
  For 
  decades 
  they 
  have 
  been 
  the 
  mandatory 
  forest 
  advisor 
  and 
  service 
  coordinator 
  for 
  small 
  
woodlot 
  owners 
  in 
  Finland. 
  In 
  fact, 
  until 
  2014 
  it 
  was 
  legislated 
  that 
  private 
  woodlot 
  owners 
  had 
  to 
  
belong 
  to 
  an 
  FMA, 
  although 
  this 
  statute 
  was 
  recently 
  changed 
  to 
  allow 
  small 
  private 
  forest 
  owners 
  the 
  
freedom 
  to 
  choose 
  management 
  service 
  providers. 
  Despite 
  the 
  new 
  freedom, 
  80 
  percent 
  of 
  forest 
  
management 
  activities 
  on 
  private 
  forests 
  are 
  still 
  carried 
  out 
  by 
  FMAs. 
  In 
  2016 
  there 
  were 
  76 
  FMAs 
  in 
  
Finland, 
  after 
  an 
  amalgamation 
  of 
  smaller 
  FMAs 
  took 
  place 
  in 
  recent 
  years. 
  This 
  amalgamation 
  resulted 
  
in 
  more 
  efficiency 
  of 
  service 
  delivery, 
  and 
  the 
  benefits 
  of 
  the 
  economy 
  of 
  scale 
  for 
  wood 
  supply 
  and 
  
treatment 
  scheduling 
  that 
  comes 
  from 
  a 
  larger 
  land 
  base 
  . 
   
  
 
  

16  
  

  
  
Figure  5.  The  organizational  support  structures  for  sm all  private  forest  owners  in  
Finland  (2016  data). 
   
  

  
Figure  6.  The  Organization  of  M TK  (2011).

17  
  

   
FMA 
  staffing 
  includes 
  managers, 
  clerks, 
  foresters, 
  engineers, 
  GIS 
  experts, 
  and 
  sales 
  managers. 
  Trust 
  in 
  
the 
  local 
  FMA 
  was 
  high 
  at 
  the 
  one 
  family 
  woodlot 
  we 
  visited 
  because, 
  as 
  the 
  woodlot 
  owner 
  explained, 
  
they 
  have 
  had 
  decades 
  of 
  contact 
  with 
  the 
  same 
  FMA 
  forester. 
  The 
  FMA 
  manager 
  reports 
  to 
  an 
  elected 
  
board 
  of 
  woodlot 
  owner 
  members. 
  As 
  an 
  example 
  of 
  the 
  power 
  that 
  comes 
  from 
  the 
  collective, 
  the 
  MTK 
  
region 
  visited 
  during 
  the 
  tour, 
  Pohjois-­‐Savo 
  (North 
  Savo) 
  represents 
  26,000 
  woodlot 
  owners 
  from 
  the 
  
general 
  population 
  of 
  250,000. 
  The 
  landbase 
  covers 
  1.4 
  million 
  hectares 
  of 
  forest 
  land, 
  71 
  percent 
  of 
  
which 
  is 
  privately 
  owned. 
  The 
  tour 
  visited 
  one 
  of 
  the 
  four 
  FMAs 
  in 
  the 
  region, 
  called 
  Metsanhoitoy-­‐
hdistys. 
  In 
  2015 
  this 
  FMA 
  had 
  5742 
  members, 
  with 
  258,411 
  hectares 
  of 
  forest 
  land. 
   
  
Woodlot 
  owners 
  pay 
  for 
  services 
  provided 
  by 
  the 
  FMAs 
  in 
  three 
  ways: 
  (1) 
  annual 
  membership 
  fees, 
  
which 
  are 
  about 
  €100 
  per 
  owner; 
  (2) 
  commission 
  on 
  harvest 
  sales 
  (€0.15 
  / 
  cubic 
  metres); 
  and 
  (3) 
  fees 
  
for 
  services, 
  such 
  as 
  updating 
  of 
  management 
  plans. 
  These 
  fees 
  cover 
  the 
  full 
  cost 
  of 
  all 
  required 
  FMA 
  
services. 
  For 
  woodlot 
  owners, 
  these 
  expenses 
  amount 
  to 
  a 
  small 
  fraction 
  of 
  the 
  significant 
  stumpage 
  
revenues 
  received 
  from 
  wood 
  sales. 
  Table 
  6 
  compares 
  the 
  Pohjois–Savo 
  Region 
  statistics 
  with 
  the 
  seven 
  
western 
  counties 
  of 
  Nova 
  Scotia. 
  This 
  table 
  shows 
  the 
  positive 
  impact 
  the 
  services 
  provided 
  by 
  FMAs 
  
have 
  on 
  small 
  private 
  forest 
  production 
  in 
  Finland. 
  
Table  6.  Com paring  the  Pohjois–Savo  Region  of  Finland  to  the  Seven  W estern  Counties  
of  Nova  Scotia.  
 
  
No. 
  of 
  Forest 
  Owners 
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
  
Small 
  Woodlot 
  Forest 
  Area 
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
  
 
  
Annual 
  forest 
  Growth 
  
Annual 
  Harvest 
  (2015) 
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
  

Pohjois 
  – 
  Savo 
  
26,000 
  
1,000,000 
  ha 
  

Large 
  Sawmills 
  (150 
  km. 
  radius) 
  
Pulp, 
  Paper 
  and 
  / 
  or 
  Paperboard 
  Mills 
  (150 
  
km 
  radius) 
  
Forestry 
  Professionals 
  working 
  with 
  woodlot 
  
owners 
  

8-­‐10 
  
6 
  

[unknown] 
  
3
756,000 
  m /year 
  
 
  
1 
  (Freeman’s) 
  
0 
  

50-­‐70 
  

1 
  

3

5,200,000 
  m /year 
  
3
4,400,000 
  m /year 
   
   
   
   
   
  

Seven 
  Western 
  Counties 
  
[unknown] 
  
935,000 
  ha 
  

 
   
  

3 . 1 . 2    G O V E R N M E N T    F O R E S T    C E N T E R S   
Government 
  support 
  for 
  the 
  small 
  private 
  forest 
  sector 
  also 
  comes 
  from 
  the 
  state 
  funded 
  Finnish 
  Forest 
  
Centres 
  (Suomen 
  metsäkeskus) 
  which 
  are 
  staffed 
  by 
  the 
  Ministry 
  of 
  Agriculture 
  and 
  Forestry. 
  The 
  state 
  
is 
  acknowledged 
  as 
  the 
  central 
  actor 
  in 
  bolstering 
  the 
  forest 
  sector 
  through 
  services 
  such 
  as 
  this. 
  The 
  
Forest 
  Centres 
  cover 
  five 
  service 
  areas 
  defined 
  by 
  region 
  (Figure 
  7) 
  and 
  employ 
  approximately 
  530 
  
people 
  (2016 
  figures). 
   
  
Figure 
  8 
  shows 
  that, 
  in 
  2016, 
  the 
  Forest 
  Centres 
  focused 
  on 
  two 
  service 
  delivery 
  areas: 
  forestry 
  business 
  
services 
  and 
  forest 
  data 
  and 
  auditing 
  services. 
  The 
  tour 
  group 
  spent 
  some 
  time 
  with 
  a 
  Forest 
  Centre 
  
employee 
  whose 
  main 
  responsibilities 
  involve 
  offering 
  business 
  counselling 
  services 
  to 
  forestry 
   
  
18  
  

  
  
Figure  7.  Five  geographic  regions  covered  by  the  Finnish  Government’s  Regional  Forest  
Centres  (Source:  M etsakeskus)  

 
  
Figure  8.  Two  service  delivery  areas  of  Finnish  Government’s  Regional  Forest  Centres  
(Source:  M etsakeskus) 
  
contractors 
  in 
  an 
  effort 
  to 
  ensure 
  they 
  are 
  successful 
  and 
  profitable. 
  No 
  such 
  services 
  are 
  available 
  to 
  
forestry 
  contractors 
  on 
  a 
  widespread 
  basis 
  in 
  Nova 
  Scotia. 
  
Within 
  their 
  forest 
  data 
  responsibilities, 
  the 
  centres 
  also 
  provide 
  full 
  inventory 
  support 
  for 
  private 
  
woodlot 
  owners, 
  collecting 
  the 
  inventory 
  and 
  audit 
  data 
  and 
  sharing 
  the 
  information 
  with 
  all 
  forest 
  
owners 
  and 
  forestry 
  professionals 
  through 
  the 
  Metsaan.fi 
  database. 
  Their 
  programs 
  have 
  evolved 
  to 
  
19  
  

 online 
  and 
  mobile 
  apps 
  to 
  give 
  owners 
  rapid 
  access 
  to 
  their 
  woodlot 
  information 
  and 
  timber 
  sales. 
  The 
  
marketplace 
  software 
  allows 
  for 
  landowners, 
  managers 
  and 
  wood 
  purchasers 
  to 
  show 
  available 
  harvest 
  
volumes 
  and 
  make 
  bids. 
  It 
  resembles 
  Kijiji, 
  with 
  a 
  real-­‐time 
  tracker 
  of 
  individual 
  transactions 
  not 
  unlike 
  a 
  
newsfeed 
  or 
  stock 
  ticker. 
  There 
  is 
  another 
  e-­‐marketplace 
  for 
  sales 
  of 
  firewood 
  and 
  non-­‐timber 
  forest 
  
products. 
  
The 
  web 
  and 
  mobile 
  phone 
  interfaces 
  permit 
  free 
  access 
  to 
  information 
  for 
  forest 
  owners 
  and, 
  
therefore, 
  better 
  informed 
  decision-­‐making 
  by 
  absentee 
  owners. 
  As 
  has 
  been 
  the 
  case 
  in 
  Nova 
  Scotia, 
  
there 
  is 
  a 
  trend 
  where 
  the 
  newer 
  generations 
  of 
  woodlot 
  owners 
  are 
  less 
  connected 
  to 
  and 
  less 
  
dependent 
  on 
  the 
  land 
  than 
  their 
  predecessors. 
  This 
  easy 
  access 
  to 
  woodlot 
  information 
  online 
  allows 
  
woodlot 
  owners 
  to 
  be 
  involved 
  in 
  the 
  management 
  of 
  their 
  forest 
  holdings 
  even 
  though 
  they 
  may 
  live 
  a 
  
long 
  distance 
  away. 
   
  
The 
  Forest 
  Centres 
  are 
  also 
  responsible 
  for 
  the 
  implementation 
  of 
  regional 
  forest 
  management 
  
planning, 
  using 
  the 
  forest 
  inventory 
  data 
  for 
  this 
  purpose. 
  The 
  regional 
  plans 
  are 
  mainly 
  a 
  stand 
  map 
  
and 
  inventory 
  database 
  with 
  stand-­‐by-­‐stand 
  proposals 
  for 
  cuttings, 
  silviculture 
  and 
  other 
  forest 
  
activities. 
  These 
  regional 
  plans 
  are 
  delivered 
  at 
  a 
  reasonable 
  price 
  to 
  the 
  local 
  FMA 
  to 
  support 
  their 
  
extension 
  services 
  and 
  operational 
  annual 
  planning 
  for 
  woodlot 
  owners. 
   
  
Under 
  the 
  regional 
  plan, 
  each 
  owner 
  is 
  offered 
  a 
  more 
  detailed 
  individual 
  management 
  plan 
  for 
  their 
  
forest 
  holding. 
  Each 
  regional 
  Finnish 
  Forest 
  Centre 
  and 
  local 
  FMA 
  has 
  specialists 
  on 
  staff 
  (GIS 
  systems, 
  
timber 
  cruisers, 
  management 
  plan 
  writers, 
  business 
  analysts) 
  responsible 
  for 
  putting 
  data 
  together 
  for 
  
the 
  woodlot 
  owner 
  or 
  forest 
  entrepreneur 
  (contractor). 
  On 
  average, 
  about 
  60 
  percent 
  of 
  owners 
  use 
  
this 
  opportunity 
  to 
  receive 
  a 
  plan, 
  available 
  to 
  them 
  at 
  half 
  the 
  actual 
  cost. 
  The 
  plan 
  comes 
  with 
  
treatment 
  schedules 
  and 
  associated 
  harvest 
  volumes 
  and 
  financial 
  estimates. 
  Forest 
  management 
  plans 
  
for 
  individual 
  forest 
  holdings 
  are 
  created 
  for 
  a 
  planning 
  period 
  of 
  10 
  years 
  (20 
  years 
  in 
  northern 
  Finland). 
  
The 
  contents 
  of 
  an 
  individual 
  plan 
  are 
  confidential 
  and 
  accessible 
  online 
  only 
  to 
  the 
  landowner 
  and 
  the 
  
responsible 
  professional 
  forester. 
  
The 
  Forest 
  Centres 
  also 
  conduct 
  audits 
  of 
  forestry 
  operations 
  on 
  small 
  private 
  forests 
  in 
  order 
  to 
  enforce 
  
forestry 
  legislation. 
  Compliance 
  is 
  documented 
  as 
  very 
  high, 
  as 
  the 
  FMAs 
  , 
  MTK 
  and 
  the 
  Forest 
  Centres 
  
work 
  together 
  to 
  create 
  an 
  ‘enabling 
  environment’ 
  for 
  woodlot 
  owners 
  that 
  motivates 
  owners 
  to 
  
sustainably 
  manage 
  their 
  forests. 
  Woodlot 
  owners 
  in 
  Finland 
  are 
  constantly 
  reminded 
  of 
  the 
  need 
  to 
  
manage 
  their 
  forest 
  lands 
  for 
  the 
  benefit 
  of 
  society. 
  

3.2    I NTENSIVE   S USTAINABLE   F OREST   M ANAGEM ENT   
Private 
  forests 
  in 
  Finland 
  are 
  predominantly 
  artificially 
  regenerated, 
  known 
  as 
  plantation 
  forestry, 
  and 
  
are 
  intensively 
  managed 
  through 
  several 
  thinnings, 
  to 
  maximize 
  quality 
  and 
  volume 
  over 
  the 
  full 
  
rotation 
  of 
  a 
  given 
  stand. 
  On 
  average, 
  across 
  Finland, 
  clearcutting 
  accounts 
  for 
  only 
  21 
  percent 
  of 
  the 
  
total 
  harvest 
  area 
  while 
  merchantable 
  thinnings 
  are 
  73 
  percent 
  of 
  the 
  total. 
  Typical 
  activities 
  scheduled 
  
over 
  a 
  forest 
  stand 
  rotation 
  are 
  listed 
  in 
  Table 
  2 
  (page 
  5). 
  These 
  treatments 
  have 
  widespread 
  cultural 
  
acceptance. 
  Forest 
  owners 
  are 
  offered 
  free 
  training 
  and 
  understand 
  the 
  concept 
  of 
  silviculture. 
  They 
  
accept 
  the 
  labour-­‐intensive, 
  time-­‐consuming 
  and 
  unprofitable 
  planting 
  and 
  weeding 
  as 
  necessary 
  steps 
  
20  
  

 in 
  growing 
  a 
  forest 
  and 
  are 
  part 
  of 
  the 
  business 
  model 
  of 
  owning 
  a 
  private 
  woodlot. 
  While 
  some 
  
government 
  subsidies 
  do 
  exist, 
  the 
  woodlot 
  owner 
  pays 
  most 
  of 
  the 
  cost 
  (~ 
  70 
  percent) 
  for 
  regeneration 
  
and 
  early 
  tending. 
  Planting 
  and 
  early 
  tending, 
  including 
  weeding, 
  are 
  considered 
  pragmatic 
  long-­‐term 
  
investments 
  for 
  maximum 
  wood 
  supply 
  and 
  economic 
  return 
  for 
  woodlot 
  owners. 
  Table 
  7 
  shows 
  forest 
  
statistics 
  and 
  woodlot 
  income 
  earned 
  for 
  the 
  average 
  woodlot 
  owner 
  in 
  the 
  Pohjois-­‐Savo 
  region 
  of 
  
Finland. 
  Equivalent 
  information 
  is 
  not 
  readily 
  available 
  in 
  Nova 
  Scotia. 
  
 
  
Table  7.  Average  Forest  Owner  In  Pohjois-­‐Savo  Region  of  Finland    
•
•
•
•
•
•

He 
  is 
  a 
  retired 
  man 
  or 
  older 
  worker. 
  
He 
  is 
  60 
  years 
  old. 
  
He 
  owns 
  about 
  38 
  hectares 
  of 
  forest 
  land. 
  
Total 
  standing 
  volume 
  of 
  trees 
  on 
  his 
  woodlot 
  is 
  over 
  5000 
  cubic 
  metres 
  (2200 
  cords). 
  
Annual 
  harvest 
  is 
  180 
  cubic 
  metres 
  (80 
  cords) 
  or 
  550 
  cubic 
  metres 
  every 
  3 
  years. 
  
Income 
  is 
  about 
  $7500 
  CAD 
  per 
  year 
  or 
  $210 
  per 
  hectare 
  per 
  year 
  before 
  taxes. 
  

  
 
  
In 
  2015, 
  the 
  total 
  net 
  annual 
  stumpage 
  paid 
  to 
  small 
  private 
  woodlot 
  owners 
  in 
  Finland 
  was 
  over 
  €1.3 
  
billion 
  ($2 
  billion 
  CAD). 
  If 
  all 
  things 
  in 
  the 
  small 
  private 
  forest 
  sector 
  in 
  Nova 
  Scotia 
  were 
  equal 
  to 
  
Finland, 
  this 
  would 
  mean 
  that 
  in 
  2015, 
  woodlot 
  owners 
  would 
  have 
  received 
  approximately 
  $400 
  million 
  
in 
  stumpage 
  for 
  sustainably 
  harvested 
  wood 
  from 
  their 
  forest 
  lands. 
  
The 
  annual 
  incremental 
  growth 
  (in 
  Pohjois-­‐Savo) 
  is 
  currently 
  9.5 
  million 
  cubic 
  metres 
  with 
  harvest 
  levels 
  
at 
  7.3 
  million 
  cubic 
  metres 
  annually 
  from 
  operating 
  on 
  a 
  landbase 
  of 
  65,000 
  ha. 
  This 
  translates 
  to 
  112 
  
cubic 
  metres 
  per 
  hectare 
  over 
  all 
  harvest 
  treatments, 
  77 
  percent 
  of 
  which 
  are 
  in 
  merchantable 
  
thinnings. 
  The 
  return 
  on 
  this 
  long-­‐term 
  investment 
  and 
  commitment 
  can 
  value 
  at 
  just 
  under 
  $19,000 
  
CAD 
  per 
  hectare 
  in 
  today’s 
  dollars 
  (see 
  Appendix 
  4). 
   
  
In 
  Finland, 
  the 
  average 
  woodlot 
  size 
  is 
  38-­‐44 
  hectares 
  and 
  the 
  average 
  final 
  clearcut 
  harvest 
  area 
  is 
  3-­‐4 
  
hectares. 
  This 
  means 
  that 
  on 
  average, 
  a 
  small 
  woodlot 
  owner 
  would 
  have 
  10-­‐12 
  of 
  these 
  small 
  harvests 
  
spread 
  out 
  over 
  80-­‐100 
  years, 
  that 
  is, 
  the 
  growth 
  cycle, 
  or 
  stand 
  rotation, 
  on 
  their 
  woodlots. 
  On 
  
average, 
  woodlot 
  owners 
  in 
  Finland 
  earn 
  $145 
  CAD 
  per 
  hectare 
  annually 
  before 
  taxes 
  on 
  their 
  forest 
  
holdings 
  (Figure 
  9). 
  The 
  estimated 
  gross 
  yearly 
  income 
  for 
  a 
  woodlot 
  of 
  38 
  hectares 
  at 
  $145 
  per 
  hectare 
  
is 
  $5510 
  CAD 
  per 
  year.10 
   
  
In 
  2015, 
  the 
  net 
  annual 
  stumpage 
  paid 
  was 
  over 
  €1.5 
  billion 
  or 
  $2.27 
  billion 
  CAD, 
  of 
  which 
  87 
  percent 
  
was 
  paid 
  to 
  owners 
  of 
  non-­‐industrial 
  small 
  private 
  forests 
  (Table 
  8). 
   
  
 
  
  

21  
  

  
  
  

Figure  9.  Operating  profit,  per  hectare,  1991-­‐2015  (€  /  ha).  (Source:  Natural  Resources  
Institute  Finland)  
  
Table  8.  Stum page  Earnings  (Source:  Natural  Resources  Institute  of  Finland)  
Land 
  Tenure 
  

Gross 
  stumpage 
  
earnings 
   
  

Net 
  stumpage 
  
earnings 
  

Non-­‐industrial, 
  
private 
  forests 
  
(NIPF) 
  

 
  € 
  1,708,364,000 
   
  

 
  € 
  1,345,000,000 
   
  

Forest 
  industries 
  
and 
  the 
  State 
  
Total 
  

 
  € 
  292,910,000 
   
  
 
  € 
  2,001,274,000 
   
  

 
  € 
  198,000,000 
   
  
 
  € 
  1,543,000,000 
   
  

  
  
  
  

  
22  

  

 4.0    A    C O M P A R I S O N    O F    T H E    S M A L L    P R I V A T E    F O R E S T    S E C T O R    I N   
F I N L A N D    A N D    N O V A    S C O T I A   
 
  
In 
  this 
  section, 
  Table 
  9 
  compares 
  the 
  Finnish 
  and 
  Nova 
  Scotian 
  small 
  private 
  forest 
  sectors 
  side-­‐by-­‐side 
  
on 
  select 
  attributes. 
   
  
Table  9.  Com paring  the  Sm all  Private  Forest  Sectors  of  Finland  and  Nova  Scotia  
ATTRIBUTE 
  

FINLAND 
  

1. 
  Forest 
  Statistics 
  and 
  
ownership 
   
  

The 
  total 
  forest 
  area 
  is 
  22,820,000 
   The 
  total 
  forest 
  area 
  is 
  4,240,000 
  
hectares; 
  the 
  total 
  annual 
  harvest 
   hectares; 
  the 
  total 
  annual 
  harvest 
  is 
  
is 
  68,000,000 
  cubic 
  metres/year. 
  
4,000,000 
  cubic 
  metres/year 
  (2015) 
  

 
  
 
  

Small 
  private 
  ownership: 
  60 
  
percent 
  of 
  the 
  total 
  forest 
  area; 
  
supply 
  80 
  percent 
  of 
  the 
  total 
  
annual 
  harvest. 
  
There 
  are 
  632,000 
  owners. 
  
346,400 
  owners 
  have 
  parcels 
  
greater 
  than 
  2 
  hectares 
  in 
  size. 
  
The 
  average 
  woodlot 
  size 
  is 
  35-­‐40 
  
hectares. 
  

2. 
  Tree 
  species 
  
 
  

Northern 
  Boreal 
  Forest 
  (simple 
  
forest) 
  

 
  

Three 
  main 
  species: 
   
  
Norway 
  Spruce, 
  Scots 
  Pine 
  & 
  
Silver 
  Birch 
  

3. 
  Tree 
  growth/Site 
  
Productivity 
  
 
  

4. 
  Forest 
  terrain 
  
conditions 
  

In 
  Pohjois-­‐Savo 
  region 
  of 
  central 
  
Finland 
  tree 
  growth 
  is 
  
approximately 
  7 
  cubic 
  metres 
  per 
  
hectare 
  per 
  year 
  for 
  Norway 
  
spruce 
  and 
  Scots 
  pine. 
  Tree 
  
improvement 
  programs, 
  site 
  
preparation, 
  thinning 
  regimes 
  and 
  
forest 
  fertilization 
  over 
  a 
  long 
  
period 
  of 
  time 
  positively 
  impact 
  
this 
  growth. 
  

NOVA 
  SCOTIA 
  

Small 
  private 
  ownership: 
  53 
  percent 
  of 
  
the 
  total 
  forest 
  area; 
  supply 
  63 
  percent 
  
of 
  the 
  total 
  annual 
  harvest 
  (2015). 
  
There 
  is 
  a 
  deficit 
  in 
  data 
  on 
  cataloguing 
  
the 
  number 
  of 
  owners 
  in 
  Nova 
  Scotia. 
  It 
  
is 
  estimated 
  that 
  there 
  are 
  35,000 
  small 
  
private 
  forest 
  parcels. 
  
 
  
 
  
Acadian 
  Forest 
  (complex 
  forest) 
  
Sixteen 
  species 
  with 
  significant 
  growing 
  
stock, 
  eight 
  of 
  which 
  are 
  hardwood. 
  
Nova 
  Scotia 
  has 
  potentially 
  higher 
  value 
  
softwoods 
  and 
  hardwoods 
  than 
  Finland. 
  
According 
  to 
  NSDNR 
  forest 
  inventory 
  
information, 
  average 
  potential 
  tree 
  
growth 
  in 
  Nova 
  Scotia 
  for 
  all 
  forest 
  
lands 
  is 
  approximately 
  6 
  cubic 
  metres 
  
per 
  hectare 
  per 
  year. 
  This 
  growth 
  could 
  
likely 
  be 
  enhanced 
  with 
  intensive 
  forest 
  
management 
  practices. 
  Nova 
  Scotia 
  has 
  
challenges 
  with 
  windthrow 
  and 
  form 
  
because 
  of 
  exposure 
  to 
  open 
  ocean. 
  

(See 
  Appendix 
  2) 
  Very 
  similar 
  to 
  
Nova 
  Scotia; 
  not 
  as 
  hilly 
   
  

Very 
  similar 
  to 
  Finland; 
  steep 
  terrain 
  is 
  
more 
  common 
  particularly 
  in 
  eastern 
  
Limited 
  access 
  in 
  summer 
  because 
   Nova 
  Scotia. 
  
of 
  wet 
  ground. 
  
23  

  

   
Table  9  Cont’d  
ATTRIBUTE 
  

FINLAND 
  

5. 
  Forest 
  Policy, 
  Culture 
   Strong, 
  focused 
  forestry 
  
& 
  Attitude 
  
legislation. 
  Countrywide 
  
acceptance 
  of 
  forests 
  and 
  the 
  
Advantage: 
  Finland 
   
  
sector 
  as 
  green 
  gold 
  for 
  the 
  
Finnish 
  economy. 
  Strong 
  co-­‐
operation 
  between 
  owners, 
  
industry 
  and 
  government. 
  The 
  
government 
  is 
  currently 
  focused 
  
on 
  the 
  new 
  bioeconomy. 
  

NOVA 
  SCOTIA 
  
Lack 
  of 
  focused 
  forest 
  policy, 
  
particularly 
  for 
  small 
  private 
  forests. 
  
Disengaged 
  small 
  private 
  woodlot 
  
sector. 
  Described 
  as 
  a 
  culture 
  of 
  
conflict. 
  The 
  economic 
  potential 
  of 
  
intensive 
  sustainable 
  forest 
  
management 
  is 
  not 
  well 
  known 
  or 
  
understood. 
  There 
  is 
  huge 
  untapped 
  
potential 
  to 
  create 
  wealth 
  for 
  woodlot 
  
owners 
  and 
  the 
  economy 
  by 
  sustainably 
  
intensifying 
  forest 
  management. 
  
 
  

6. 
  Woodlot 
  owner 
  
support 
  network 
  
 
  
Advantage: 
  Finland 
  

  

100 
  percent 
  coverage 
  of 
  the 
  small 
  
private 
  landbase 
  by 
  local 
  Forest 
  
Management 
  Associations 
  (FMAs). 
  
85 
  percent 
  of 
  woodlot 
  owners 
  
belong 
  to 
  FMAs. 
  FMAs 
  are 
  
assembled 
  under 
  13 
  regional 
  MTK 
  
offices 
  and 
  the 
  national 
  office. 
  
This 
  creates 
  a 
  lobbying 
  
organization 
  for 
  discussions 
  with 
  
government. 
  Woodlot 
  owners 
  are 
  
very 
  well 
  organized 
  and 
  appear 
  to 
  
be 
  the 
  power 
  brokers 
  in 
  the 
  
Finnish 
  forest 
  sector, 
  supplying 
  80 
  
percent 
  of 
  the 
  wood 
  used 
  by 
  
industry. 
  

The 
  woodlot-­‐owner 
  support 
  network 
  is 
  
fragmented 
  with 
  inconsistent 
  
availability 
  and 
  delivery 
  of 
  forest 
  
management 
  services 
  across 
  the 
  
province. 
  There 
  is 
  very 
  low 
  participation 
  
rates 
  by 
  woodlot 
  owners 
  in 
  intensive 
  
sustainable 
  forest 
  management. 
  Six 
  of 
  
the 
  original 
  18 
  former 
  group 
  ventures 
  in 
  
the 
  province 
  are 
  still 
  offering 
  various 
  
levels 
  of 
  forest 
  management 
  services 
  to 
  
woodlot 
  owners, 
  mostly 
  in 
  central 
  Nova 
  
Scotia 
  and 
  Cape 
  Breton. 
  The 
  ‘Service 
  
Area’ 
  concept 
  is 
  being 
  slowly 
  rolled 
  out 
  
across 
  the 
  province. 
  This 
  started 
  with 
  
the 
  Cape 
  Breton 
  Privatelands 
  
Partnership 
  (CBPP) 
  which 
  is 
  in 
  Year 
  3 
  of 
  
a 
  five-­‐year 
  pilot 
  project 
  to 
  serve 
  Cape 
  
Breton 
  Service 
  Area. 
  In 
  2017 
  the 
  
Western 
  Woodlot 
  Services 
  Co-­‐operative 
  
was 
  launched 
  to 
  serve 
  the 
  seven 
  
westernmost 
  counties. 
  

  

24  
  

 Table  9  Cont’d  
ATTRIBUTE 
  

FINLAND 
  

NOVA 
  SCOTIA 
  

7. 
  Intensive 
  sustainable 
  
forest 
  management 
  

Major 
  investments 
  were 
  made 
  50-­‐60 
  
years 
  ago 
  by 
  the 
  government 
  in 
  
tree/seedling 
  improvement, 
  
thinning 
  and 
  ditching 
  wet 
  sites 
  to 
  
improve 
  tree 
  growth. 
  Finnish 
  forests 
  
now 
  grow 
  80 
  percent 
  more 
  wood 
  
than 
  they 
  did 
  in 
  1970. 
  There 
  is 
  100 
  
percent 
  participation 
  in 
  intensive 
  
sustainable 
  forest 
  management 
  by 
  
woodlot 
  owners. 
  Plantation 
  forestry 
  
is 
  the 
  accepted 
  regeneration 
  
strategy. 
  Harvest 
  is 
  followed 
  by 
  site 
  
preparation, 
  planting, 
  
manual/mechanical 
  weeding, 
  2-­‐3 
  
commercial 
  thinnings 
  and 
  a 
  final 
  
harvest 
  over 
  70-­‐100 
  rotations. 
  Each 
  
woodlot 
  is 
  managed 
  as 
  an 
  
independent 
  forest 
  entity 
  with 
  its 
  
own 
  sustainable 
  Annual 
  Allowable 
  
Cut 
  (AAC). 
  The 
  focus 
  is 
  on 
  
maximizing 
  forest 
  growth 
  for 
  
woodlot 
  owners 
  and 
  the 
  Finnish 
  
economy. 
  

Less 
  than 
  10 
  percent 
  of 
  woodlots 
  
are 
  being 
  intensively 
  and 
  
sustainably 
  managed.Many 
  
woodlots 
   
  are 
  being 
  “mined”, 
  
meaning, 
  clearcut 
  from 
  boundary 
  
to 
  boundary. 
  This 
  is 
  more 
  the 
  
norm 
  than 
  sustainable 
  
management. 
  Very 
  little 
  attention 
  
is 
  paid 
  to 
  regeneration 
  after 
  
harvest 
  on 
  the 
  majority 
  of 
  small 
  
woodlots. 
  Minimal 
  consideration 
  
is 
  given 
  to 
  future 
  forests, 
  their 
  
quality 
  or 
  their 
  value. 
  

The 
  Finns 
  have 
  an 
  inventory 
  of 
  every 
  
tree 
  growing 
  in 
  their 
  forests 
  
…species, 
  age, 
  size, 
  location 
  and 
  
who 
  owns 
  it! 
  This 
  extensive, 
  
accurate 
  forest 
  inventory 
  and 
  forest 
  
growth 
  information 
  uses 
  leading 
  
edge 
  technologies 
  including 
  LiDar. 
  
They 
  have 
  the 
  most 
  private 
  forest 
  
inventoried 
  of 
  any 
  country 
  in 
  the 
  
world 
  and 
  this 
  information 
  is 
  used 
  in 
  
forestry 
  policy 
  decision-­‐making, 
  
forest 
  management 
  planning, 
  new 
  
investments, 
  sustainability, 
  
certification, 
  carbon 
  storage 
  data 
  
and 
  research. 
  All 
  data 
  is 
  made 
  
available 
  to 
  the 
  public 
  on-­‐line 
  
through 
  the 
  Finnish 
  Forest 
  Research 
  
Institute 
  and 
  other 
  government 
  
outlets. 
  Inventory 
  is 
  easier 
  because 
  
forests 
  are 
  less 
  complex. 
  
  

Nova 
  Scotia 
  has 
  out-­‐of-­‐date 
  forest 
  
resource 
  information, 
  strategies 
  
and 
  technologies. 
  Best 
  guess 
  
estimates 
  are 
  made 
  on 
  standing 
  
timber 
  volumes 
  and 
  forest 
  
growth. 
  The 
  task 
  of 
  gathering 
  and 
  
managing 
  inventory 
  data 
  is 
  made 
  
more 
  difficult 
  by 
  the 
  variety 
  of 
  
species, 
  problems 
  with 
  form 
  and 
  
uneven-­‐aged 
  stands 
  of 
  poor 
  
quality. 
  

 
  
Advantage: 
  Finland 
  

8. 
  Forest 
  
Inventory/Information 
  
Technology 
   
  
 
  
Advantage: 
  Finland 
  

  

25  
  

 Table  9  Cont’d  
ATTRIBUTE 
  

FINLAND 
  

NOVA 
  SCOTIA 
  

9. 
  Roundwood 
  markets 
  

Roundwood 
  markets 
  are 
  extensive 
  
for 
  all 
  products 
  generated 
  from 
  
thinning 
  and 
  final 
  harvests 
  of 
  all 
  
three 
  commercial 
  species. 
  All 
  
roundwood 
  goes 
  to 
  the 
  highest 
  value 
  
end 
  use: 
  first, 
  veneer 
  logs, 
  second, 
  
sawlogs, 
  third, 
  pulpwood, 
  and 
  
fourth, 
  energywood. 
  There 
  had 
  been 
  
significant 
  roundwood 
  market 
  
expansion 
  since 
  the 
  mid-­‐1990s. 
  
Newsprint 
  mills 
  have 
  been 
  retooled 
  
to 
  produce 
  other 
  pulp 
  and 
  
paperboard 
  products, 
  resulting 
  in 
  
continuing 
  high 
  demand 
  for 
  
pulpwood 
  throughout 
  the 
  country. 
  
The 
  market 
  for 
  forest-­‐based 
  
biomass, 
  small 
  trees, 
  branches 
  and 
  
stumps 
  used 
  in 
  community 
  district 
  
heating 
  plants 
  has 
  seen 
  rapid 
  
expansion 
  over 
  the 
  past 
  10 
  years. 
  
Government 
  incentives 
  have 
  been 
  
provided 
  to 
  the 
  bioenergy 
  industry 
  
to 
  support 
  conversions 
  from 
  foreign 
  
coal 
  and 
  oil 
  to 
  local 
  renewable 
  wood. 
  

Approximately 
  50 
  percent 
  of 
  forest 
  
product 
  markets 
  for 
  both 
  sawn 
  
products 
  and 
  pulp 
  and 
  paper 
  have 
  
disappeared 
  over 
  the 
  last 
  ten 
  years. 
  
Currently, 
  most 
  mills 
  that 
  are 
  still 
  
operating 
  are 
  over-­‐supplied 
  with 
  
roundwood. 
  This 
  results 
  in 
  depressed 
  
roadside 
  roundwood 
  prices 
  and 
  
extreme 
  challenges 
  to 
  forest 
  
operators 
  to 
  secure 
  markets 
  for 
  all 
  
grades 
  of 
  wood. 
  Intensifying 
  forest 
  
management 
  activities 
  on 
  small 
  
private 
  forests 
  will 
  not 
  be 
  possible 
  
without 
  expansion 
  of 
  market 
  
opportunities 
  that 
  are 
  economically 
  
viable. 
  No 
  effective 
  process 
  in 
  place 
  
for 
  developing 
  new 
  roundwood 
  
markets 
  at 
  the 
  present 
  time, 
  even 
  
though 
  global 
  markets 
  for 
  wood 
  in 
  
energy 
  production 
  and 
  construction 
  
are 
  rapidly 
  expanding. 
  

 
  
Advantage: 
  Finland 
  

10. 
  Economic 
  Benefits 
  
from 
  Forests 
  

In 
  2015, 
  Finland 
  sustainably 
  
harvested 
  3 
  cubic 
  metres 
  per 
  
hectare. 
  

In 
  2015, 
  Nova 
  Scotia 
  harvested 
  only 
  1 
  
cubic 
  metre 
  per 
  hectare 
  from 
  its 
  
small 
  private 
  forest 
  area, 
  even 
  
Finland 
  generated 
  5.7 
  times 
  as 
  much 
   though, 
  on 
  average, 
  the 
  productivity 
  
and 
  growth 
  rates 
  are 
  not 
  significantly 
  
export 
  value 
  from 
  every 
  hectare 
  of 
  
forest 
  land 
  compared 
  to 
  Nova 
  Scotia. 
   different 
  from 
  Finland’s. 
   
  
Finland 
  generated 
  1.8 
  times 
  as 
  much 
    
  
export 
  value 
  per 
  cubic 
  metre 
  
harvested 
  compared 
  to 
  Nova 
  Scotia. 
  
Finland 
  generated 
  2.6 
  times 
  as 
  many 
  
jobs 
  per 
  hectare 
  of 
  forest 
  land 
  
compared 
  to 
  Nova 
  Scotia. 
  
 
  
 
  

26  
  

 5.0    C O N C L U S I O N    A N D    R E C O M M E N D A T I O N S    F O R    A C T I O N    I N   
N O V A    S C O T I A   
The 
  basic 
  purpose 
  of 
  the 
  Forestry 
  Learning 
  Tour 
  to 
  Finland 
  was 
  to 
  answer 
  the 
  research 
  question 
  ‘Why 
  is 
  
Finland 
  so 
  successful 
  in 
  managing 
  their 
  small 
  private 
  forests, 
  while 
  Nova 
  Scotia 
  is 
  not?’ 
  The 
  tour 
  was 
  one 
  
of 
  several 
  ‘prototype’ 
  projects 
  of 
  the 
  Forest 
  Lab, 
  a 
  collaborative 
  project 
  of 
  woodlot 
  owners, 
  industry 
  
workers 
  and 
  forest 
  consultants 
  from 
  across 
  Nova 
  Scotia 
  assembled 
  to 
  address 
  social 
  problems 
  in 
  the 
  
forest 
  sector. 
   
  
From 
  September 
  29 
  to 
  October 
  5, 
  2016, 
  five 
  representatives 
  from 
  Nova 
  Scotia, 
  participated 
  in 
  a 
  forestry 
  
learning 
  tour 
  to 
  Finland. 
  The 
  itinerary 
  was 
  designed 
  to 
  introduce 
  tour 
  participants 
  to 
  the 
  system 
  of 
  
service 
  organizations 
  that 
  support 
  the 
  small 
  private 
  forest 
  sector, 
  giving 
  woodlot 
  owners 
  access 
  to 
  
government, 
  as 
  well 
  as 
  providing 
  tools 
  for 
  managing 
  their 
  woodlots, 
  in 
  the 
  context 
  of 
  a 
  national 
  
strategy. 
  
This 
  report 
  is 
  a 
  summary 
  of 
  the 
  findings 
  from 
  the 
  learning 
  tour, 
  which 
  was 
  successful 
  in 
  providing 
  
relevant 
  information 
  to 
  conclude 
  that 
  Finland 
  can 
  be 
  an 
  effective 
  model 
  for 
  small 
  private 
  forestry 
  in 
  
Nova 
  Scotia. 
  The 
  tour 
  participants 
  are 
  proposing 
  that 
  Nova 
  Scotia 
  woodlot 
  owners, 
  service 
  organizations 
  
and 
  policy 
  makers 
  examine 
  how 
  the 
  best 
  practices 
  observed 
  in 
  Finland 
  could 
  be 
  implemented 
  in 
  order 
  
to 
  build 
  momentum 
  and 
  effect 
  positive 
  social 
  and 
  economic 
  change 
  in 
  rural 
  Nova 
  Scotia. 
   
  
1. 
  Culture 
  and 
  attitude 
  – 
  The 
  culture 
  of 
  forestry 
  needs 
  an 
  attitudinal 
  shift 
  from 
  negative 
  to 
  positive 
  in 
  
Nova 
  Scotia. 
  We 
  need 
  to 
  explain 
  and 
  show 
  that 
  forestry 
  is 
  an 
  economic 
  driver 
  and 
  a 
  safe 
  and 
  worthwhile 
  
industry 
  for 
  the 
  province. 
  Forestry 
  should 
  be 
  a 
  good 
  news 
  story. 
  
2. 
  Strong 
  landowner 
  support 
  network 
  – 
  Nova 
  Scotia 
  needs 
  a 
  single, 
  unified, 
  provincial 
  lobby 
  for 
  
woodlot 
  owners, 
  similar 
  to 
  MTK 
  in 
  Finland. 
  In 
  addition, 
  we 
  need 
  local 
  extension 
  offices 
  — 
  Forest 
  
Management 
  Associations 
  (FMAs) 
  — 
  providing 
  advice 
  and 
  services 
  to 
  woodlot 
  owners 
  throughout 
  NS. 
  
This 
  initiative 
  has 
  begun 
  in 
  the 
  form 
  of 
  pilot 
  projects 
  in 
  Cape 
  Breton 
  and 
  the 
  western 
  counties. 
  This 
  
approach 
  requires 
  long-­‐term 
  commitment 
  with 
  support 
  at 
  all 
  levels 
  of 
  government. 
   
  
3. 
  Intensive 
  Sustainable 
  Forest 
  Management 
  — 
  The 
  Forest 
  Strategy 
  for 
  Nova 
  Scotia 
  needs 
  to 
  be 
  
updated 
  with 
  specific 
  goals 
  for 
  annual 
  roundwood 
  harvests 
  at 
  the 
  county 
  level 
  and 
  steps 
  must 
  be 
  taken 
  
to 
  intensify 
  sustainable 
  management 
  efforts 
  to 
  meet 
  these 
  goals. 
  There 
  is 
  an 
  abundant, 
  underutilized 
  
standing 
  forest 
  resource 
  on 
  small 
  private 
  woodlots 
  in 
  the 
  province. 
  Finland 
  manages 
  to 
  produce 
  over 
  
four 
  times 
  as 
  much 
  annual 
  wood 
  harvest 
  per 
  hectare 
  on 
  small 
  private 
  forest 
  land 
  than 
  Nova 
  Scotia. 
  The 
  
tour 
  group 
  believes 
  there 
  is 
  significant 
  room 
  for 
  economic 
  growth 
  in 
  Nova 
  Scotia’s 
  small 
  private 
  forest 
  
sector. 
  
4. 
  Intensive 
  Market 
  Development 
  – 
  With 
  a 
  fully 
  integrated 
  forest 
  product 
  value 
  chain 
  that 
  includes 
  
conventional 
  forest 
  products 
  and 
  new 
  products 
  in 
  paper, 
  construction, 
  materials, 
  and 
  the 
  bioeconomy 
  
27  
  

 like 
  food 
  and 
  pharmaceuticals, 
  the 
  industry 
  would 
  become 
  economically 
  viable. 
  There 
  is 
  a 
  particular 
  
need 
  to 
  find 
  low-­‐grade 
  wood 
  markets, 
  while 
  leaving 
  enough 
  biomass 
  in 
  the 
  woods. 
  Bioenergy 
  plants 
  for 
  
district 
  heat 
  and 
  power 
  in 
  Finnish 
  towns 
  have 
  created 
  a 
  domestic 
  demand 
  for 
  low-­‐grade 
  wood 
  that 
  is 
  
scalable 
  to 
  Nova 
  Scotia 
  towns. 
  With 
  regional 
  forest 
  products 
  market 
  development 
  teams, 
  the 
  province’s 
  
forest 
  industry 
  could 
  work 
  toward 
  this 
  goal. 
  
5. 
  High 
  quality 
  forest 
  inventory 
  and 
  information 
  transfer 
  -­‐ 
  A 
  reliable 
  forest 
  inventory 
  and 
  IT 
  systems 
  to 
  
make 
  the 
  data 
  publicly 
  available 
  and 
  user 
  friendly 
  would 
  bring 
  significant 
  change 
  to 
  forest 
  management 
  
planning, 
  motivating 
  woodlot 
  owners 
  and 
  attracting 
  investors. 
  Investment 
  is 
  necessary 
  but 
  cannot 
  
happen 
  without 
  proof 
  of 
  a 
  guaranteed 
  long-­‐term 
  sustainable 
  wood 
  supply. 
   
  
 
   
  
The 
  foregoing 
  will 
  require 
  a 
  stable 
  environment 
  for 
  investment, 
  both 
  time 
  and 
  money. 
  The 
  current 
  
situation 
  in 
  Nova 
  Scotia 
  — 
  unlike 
  Finland 
  – 
  is 
  hesitation 
  and 
  uncertainty, 
  lack 
  of 
  information, 
  and 
  a 
  
policy 
  framework. 
  Currently, 
  small 
  private 
  forests 
  in 
  Finland 
  produce 
  4 
  times 
  as 
  much 
  wood 
  harvest 
  per 
  
hectare 
  annually 
  than 
  Nova 
  Scotian 
  small 
  private 
  forests, 
  even 
  though 
  tree 
  growth 
  is 
  very 
  similar 
  in 
  both 
  
places. 
  By 
  doubling 
  the 
  harvests 
  to 
  2 
  cubic 
  metres 
  per 
  hectare 
  per 
  year, 
  one 
  can 
  estimate 
  an 
  increase 
  of 
  
more 
  than 
  7,000 
  direct 
  and 
  indirect 
  jobs, 
  mostly 
  in 
  rural 
  communities. 
  
 
  
The 
  Nova 
  Scotia 
  government 
  should 
  give 
  greater 
  recognition 
  to 
  forestry 
  and 
  the 
  small 
  woodlot 
  owners. 
  
In 
  Finland 
  the 
  government 
  has 
  enabled 
  the 
  small 
  private 
  forest 
  sector 
  transformation 
  over 
  the 
  past 
  100 
  
years. 
  If 
  the 
  municipal 
  governments 
  and 
  economic 
  development 
  agencies 
  in 
  Nova 
  Scotia 
  became 
  
involved 
  in 
  this 
  forest 
  sector 
  makeover, 
  an 
  increased 
  sustainable 
  wood 
  supply, 
  improved 
  roundwood 
  
markets, 
  increased 
  forest 
  products 
  manufacturing, 
  economic 
  growth 
  and 
  job 
  creation 
  would 
  follow. 
   
  
 
  

5.1    N EXT   S TEPS   
The 
  team 
  that 
  travelled 
  to 
  Finland 
  are 
  of 
  one 
  mind 
  when 
  it 
  comes 
  to 
  the 
  usefulness 
  of 
  their 
  trip, 
  
because 
  they 
  saw 
  that 
  the 
  challenges 
  the 
  forest 
  sector 
  faces 
  in 
  Nova 
  Scotia 
  could 
  be 
  mitigated 
  by 
  the 
  
implementation 
  of 
  some 
  of 
  the 
  best 
  practices 
  that 
  they 
  saw 
  in 
  Finland. 
   
  
For 
  this 
  reason 
  they 
  have 
  organized 
  their 
  observations 
  and 
  data 
  into 
  this 
  report, 
  giving 
  details 
  and 
  
comparative 
  analysis 
  that 
  demonstrate 
  how 
  forest 
  management, 
  particularly 
  for 
  small 
  private 
  forests, 
  
can 
  be 
  improved 
  in 
  Nova 
  Scotia. 
  They 
  are 
  convinced 
  that 
  such 
  improvements 
  would 
  benefit 
  the 
  
economy, 
  especially 
  the 
  rural 
  areas 
  in 
  terms 
  of 
  providing 
  jobs, 
  by 
  managing 
  the 
  Acadian 
  forest. 
  It 
  would 
  
also 
  create 
  new 
  and 
  diversified 
  markets 
  for 
  wood 
  products. 
  This 
  report 
  is 
  useful 
  to 
  policy 
  makers, 
  the 
  
media, 
  woodlot 
  owners, 
  chambers 
  of 
  commerce, 
  RENs 
  and 
  other 
  economic 
  development 
  agencies. 
   
  
The 
  5 
  key 
  areas 
  set 
  out 
  in 
  the 
  Conclusion 
  are 
  the 
  outline 
  for 
  a 
  framework 
  that 
  can 
  initiate 
  a 
  concerted 
  
effort 
  by 
  all 
  three 
  existing 
  woodlot-­‐owner 
  organizations 
  in 
  Nova 
  Scotia 
  towards 
  a 
  common 
  goal. 
  A 
  
working 
  group 
  would 
  begin 
  to 
  develop 
  policy 
  initiatives 
  and 
  continue 
  to 
  establish 
  service 
  area 
  
organizations 
  across 
  the 
  province, 
  until 
  there 
  is 
  forest 
  management 
  advice 
  and 
  service 
  to 
  every 
  woodlot 
  
owner 
  in 
  Nova 
  Scotia. 
  This 
  cannot 
  be 
  done 
  without 
  the 
  assistance 
  and 
  coordination 
  of 
  the 
  relevant 
  
28  
  

 government 
  departments 
  (Natural 
  Resources, 
  Environment, 
  Labour 
  and 
  Advanced 
  Education, 
  
Agriculture). 
  Therefore, 
  the 
  next 
  steps 
  must 
  include 
  communication 
  across 
  government, 
  and 
  throughout 
  
the 
  value 
  chain 
  of 
  the 
  forest 
  sector. 
   
  
The 
  Finland 
  tour 
  group 
  suggests 
  that 
  their 
  findings 
  can 
  be 
  the 
  foundation 
  for 
  renewal, 
  and 
  that 
  best 
  
practices 
  can 
  be 
  modelled 
  and 
  adapted 
  for 
  Nova 
  Scotia. 
  In 
  Finland, 
  government 
  and 
  industry 
  took 
  the 
  
long 
  view, 
  and 
  included 
  a 
  wide 
  range 
  of 
  stakeholders 
  in 
  order 
  to 
  develop 
  the 
  forest 
  sector 
  over 
  the 
  past 
  
fifty 
  years. 
  Given 
  the 
  current 
  state 
  of 
  decline 
  in 
  the 
  sector 
  in 
  Nova 
  Scotia, 
  it 
  is 
  recommended 
  that 
  this 
  
initiative 
  be 
  commenced 
  without 
  delay, 
  that 
  it 
  be 
  broad 
  and 
  inclusive, 
  so 
  that 
  these 
  changes 
  will 
  be 
  
more 
  than 
  just 
  a 
  benefit 
  to 
  one 
  sector, 
  but 
  will 
  have 
  a 
  ripple 
  effect 
  throughout 
  the 
  province. 
   
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
   
  
 
  
 
  
I 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
  

  

29  
  

 A P P E N D I C E S   
A PPENDIX   1    –    F INLAND   L EARNING   T OUR   I TINERARY   
M onday  Sept  26  
Evening  
Tuesday  Sept  27  
Morning  
Afternoon  

  
Depart  Halifax  9:30  pm  Icelandair  Flight  606  
  
  
Arrive  Helsinki  1:50  pm&  pick  up  rental  vehicles    
Travel  to  and  check  in  at  hotel  
Meet  for  dinner  as  a  group  
W ednesday  Sept  28     
Morning  
History  &  Information  about  the  Finnish  Forest  Sector  
-­‐ MTK  Helsinki  
Mr.  Juha  Hakkarainen  and  Ms.  Satu-­‐MarjaTenhiala  
Afternoon  
Utilize  Wednesday  afternoon  or  evening  to  travel  from  Helsinki  to  Kuopio  
(Note:  4.5  min  hours  driving  time  to  Kuopio)  
Overnight  lodging  in  Kuopio  
Thursday  Sept  29  
  
Morning  
Activities  of  the  Forest  M anagement  Associations  (FM A)  
-­‐ Forest  Management  Association,  Metsanhoitoyhdistys                      Pohjois-­‐
Savo  Region,  Kuopio  
-­‐ Mr.  Juha  Huttunen  and  Mr.  Jukka  Hujala  
Afternoon  
Activities  of  the  FM As  continued,  field  visits?  
-­‐ Mr.  Juha  Huttunen  and  Mr.  JukkaHujala  /  Overnight  lodging  in  Kuopio  
Friday  Sept  30  
  
Morning  
Activities  of  the  FM As  continued,  selected  topics  
-­‐ Mr.  Juha  Huttunen  and  Mr.  JukkaHujala  
Afternoon  
Activities  of  the  FM As  continued,  field  visits?  
-­‐ Mr.  Juha  Huttunen  and  Mr.  JukkaHujala  /Overnight  lodging  in  Kuopio  
area  
M onday  Oct  3  
  
Morning  
Visit  Forest  Research  Station  in  Suonenjoki  
-­‐ Ms.  Katri  Himanen  
Afternoon  
Visit  Forest  Harvester  Training  Site  in  Airaksela  
-­‐   Mr.  Jouni  Seppanen      /  Overnight  in  Kuopio  
Tuesday  Oct  4  
  
Morning  
Visit  Ponsse  in  Vierema  
-­‐ Mr.  Eero  Lukkarinen  
Afternoon  
Visit  with  Ponsse  (continued)  
-­‐   Mr.  Eero  Lukkarinen  /  Overnight  in  Kuopio  
W ednesday  Oct  5  
  
Morning  
Visit  with  Kuopion  Energia  
-­‐   Mr.  Esa  Lindholm  
Afternoon  
Travel  to  Helsinki  
Evening  
-­‐  Meeting  with  Mr.  Ero  Jarvinen  
Thursday  Oct  6  
Depart  for  Halifax,  NS  
30  
  

 A PPENDIX   2    –    G ENERAL   O VERVIEW   OF   F INLAND ’ S   F OREST   E COLOGY     
This  overview  was  transcribed  and  paraphrased  from  a  website  on  the  Boreal  Forest11  

Geology –The  bedrock  and  the  soil  in  general  have  been  formed  by  the  ice  ages.  The  inland  ice  has  
eroded  the  bedrock,  scraping  off  soil  from  here  and  leaving  heaps  there.  In  places  the  rock  is  totally  
exposed.  The  tens  of  thousands  of  lakes  in  Finland  are  post-­‐glacial.  Another  unique  phenomenon,  land  
elevation,  is  also  an  effect  of  the  glaciers.  Finland  is  rising  from  the  Baltic  Sea  at  an  annual  rate  of  0.5-­‐0.8  
cm,  which  means  that  its  land  area  is  continuously  growing.  

Peatland   —  Various  kinds  of  peatlands  are  a  fundamental  element  of  the  Finnish  landscape.  In  the  cool  
and  humid  climate,  the  soil  becomes  waterlogged,  which  creates  the  right  conditions  for  peatland  
vegetation  and  the  formation  of  peat.  Originally,  about  one  third  of  Finland  was  covered  by  peatlands.  
They  have  been  drained  for  farming,  forestry  and  peat  extraction  purposes.  About  half  of  the  original  
peatland  area  has  been  preserved  in  its  virgin  state.  

Climate  —   Finland’s  climate  is  affected  by  the  Gulf  Stream,  maintaining  favourable  growing  conditions  
at  latitudes  of  60-­‐70  degrees.  Winters  average  3-­‐6  months  (south  to  north),  and  in  Lapland,  in  the  north,  
there  can  be  a  metre  of  snow.  In  southern  Finland  the  average  annual  precipitations  is  700  mm,  while  in  
the  north  it  is  400  mm.  Although  the  growing  season  is  short,  there  is  more  or  less  full  light,  enabling  
intensive  growth.    

Forest  Type   —  About  half  of  the  forest  area  consists  of  mixed  stands.  Rarer  species  are  found  mostly  
as  solitary  trees.  The  south-­‐western  corner  and  the  south  coast  of  Finland  are  touched  by  a  narrow  zone  
growing  oak,  maple,  ash  and  elm.  Finnish  forestry  aims  at  imitating  the  natural  succession.  Here  it  is  quite  
unproblematic  to  practice  near-­‐nature  forestry:  the  commercially  valuable  tree  species  belong  to  
Finland's  natural  flora  and  can  be  grown  on  their  natural  sites.  Forest  regeneration  is  comparable  with  
forest  fires  or  storms,  and  intermediate  felling  resembles  natural  thinning.  The  forests  are  managed  one  
compartment  at  a  time,  i.e.,  felling  or  management  work  is  directed  at  a  part  of  the  forest  with  a  
homogenous  tree  stand.  The  average  size  of  a  compartment  is  less  than  two  hectares.  Even  a  natural  
forest  has  a  certain  mosaic-­‐like  structure:  young  stands  here  and  more  mature  ones  there.  Forests  are  
allowed  to  grow  for  between  60  and  120  years,  depending  on  the  tree  species  and  the  composition  of  the  
site.  

Tree  Species  —   There  are  about  twenty  indigenous  tree  species  growing  in  Finland,  the  most  
common  ones  being  pine  (Pinus  silvestris),  spruce  (Picea  abies)  and  birch  (Betula  pendula  and  B.  
pubescens).  Usually  two  or  three  tree  species  dominate  a  forest.  Naturally  pure  pine  stands  are  found  in  
rocky  terrain,  on  top  of  arid  eskers  and  on  pine  swamps.  Natural  spruce  stands  are  found  on  richer  soil.  
Birch  is  commonly  found  as  part  of  a  mixed  wood,  but  it  can  occasionally  form  pure  birch  stands.  

Forest  Ecology  in  Management –  Rather  than  being  systematic  and  dull,  the  forests  are  rich  in  
variety  and  subtlety  of  detail.  Especially  in  the  southern  and  central  parts  of  the  country,  one  can  find  a  
great  variety  of  forest  types  within  even  a  small  area:  dense  stands  of  spruces,  pines  scattered  thinly  on  
poor,  heathy  soils,  clearcut  areas,  scrub  in  river  and  stream  valleys  and  stunted  growth  in  valley  bogs.  
31  
  

 Individual  hardwood  trees  grow  scattered  among  conifers  and  here  and  there  one  finds  homogeneous  
stands  of  white  birches.  The  trees  also  vary  widely  in  age.  They  are  not  monocultures,  nor  do  the  trees  
stand  in  straight,  evenly  spaced  lines.  Yet  Finnish  forests  could  not  be  said  to  be  in  a  natural  state,  either.  
Agriculture,  tree  harvesting  and  active  silviculture  have  been  re-­‐shaping  the  forests  down  through  the  
ages.  As  a  rule,  not  even  the  oldest  and  apparently  most  natural  forests  prove  to  have  remained  
completely  untouched  by  the  woodsman's  axe  when  one  looks  two  or  three  centuries  back  into  their  
history.  Prolonged  use  has  gradually  made  the  forests  more  uniform  and  consistent  in  character.  In  the  
20th  century,  foresters  have  favoured  conifers,  especially  pine,  at  the  expense  of  other  species.  The  
oldest  generations  of  trees  have  been  gradually  felled  and  the  forests  have  in  general  become  younger.  
Forestry  and  forest  roads  have  fragmented  large  contiguous  wilderness  areas.  Forest  fires  and  other  
natural  disasters  have  been  largely  prevented,  and  effective  management  has  increased  growth  rates.  
Managed  commercial  forests  of  this  kind  now  cover  over  90%  of  Finland's  productive  forest  land.  

Protected  Areas –  Finland  excels  in  forest  land  protection  relative  to  total  forested  area.  Most  of  this  
is  in  the  north.  This  amounts  to  9  percent  of  the  forested  landbase  (productive  and  non-­‐productive).  
  
Table  10.  Protected  Land  in  Finland  
Land  Classification  

Area  (ha)  

Total  Area  (ha)  

Protected  
Restricted  Land  Use  
Total  Protected  and  /  or  Restricted  
Forestry  Use  
Total  Forested    
  

2,048,000  
  915,000  
  

  
  
  2,963,000  

%  of  
Total  
Forested  
9%  
4%  
13%  

  

22,820,000  

  

References  and  other  reading:  
BorealForests.org.  https://www.borealforest.org/world/world_finland.htm  
Biodiversity.fi.  http://www.biodiversity.fi/en/habitats/forests/  
Finnish  Forest  Association:  http://www.smy.fi/  
This  is  Finland:  https://finland.fi/life-­‐society/environmental-­‐protection-­‐in-­‐finland/  
Ministry  of  Agriculture  and  Forestry:  http://mmm.fi/en/forests/biodiversity-­‐and-­‐protection  
Unfolding  the  organised  irresponsibility:  Ecosystem  approach  and  the  quest  for  forest  biodiversity  in  
Finland,  Peru,  and  Russia.  http://www.rktl.fi/www/uploads/pdf/EY/hiedanpaa_et_al_2010_unfolding.pdf  
World  Wildlife  Fund.  https://wwf.fi/en/WWF-­‐Finland-­‐s-­‐forest-­‐vision/  

32  
  

 Forest  Biodiversity  Programme  for  Southern  Finland  (METSO).  http://www.metsonpolku.fi/en-­‐
US/METSO_Programme  
Biodiversity  at  risk.  
https://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/finland_s_biodiversity_at_risk_fact_sheet_may_2013.pdf  
Sustainable  Forestry  in  Finland:  ENVI  Delegation  in  May  2016.  
file:///D:/Finland/Sustainable%20forestry%20in%20Finland,%20ENVI%20delegation%20in%20May%2020
16.pdf  
  

A PPENDIX   3    —    F ORESTRY   E DUCATION  IN   F INLAND   
General  Education  
Basic 
  descriptors 
  of 
  the 
  Finnish 
  school 
  system 
  that 
  Finns 
  themselves 
  consider 
  set 
  their 
  system 
  apart, 
  are: 
  
•
•
•
•
•

Lower 
  pressure, 
  self-­‐paced 
  learning. 
  Young 
  students 
  can 
  voluntarily 
  take 
  an 
  additional 
  year. 
  
Later 
  start 
  for 
  young 
  children 
  (age 
  7). 
  Shorter 
  school 
  day 
  and 
  longer 
  recess. 
  
More 
  freedom 
  of 
  choice 
  and 
  guided 
  but 
  self-­‐directed 
  learning 
  for 
  students. 
  
Abundant 
  resources 
  and 
  full 
  support 
  for 
  the 
  mix 
  of 
  ability 
  deliberately 
  placed 
  in 
  the 
  same 
  class. 
  
Respected, 
  juried 
  teachers 
  who 
  compete 
  for 
  acceptance 
  in 
  training 
  and 
  are 
  well 
  paid. 
  

This 
  is 
  the 
  basic 
  education 
  of 
  7-­‐16 
  year 
  olds 
  in 
  comprehensive 
  schools. 
  This 
  information 
  sets 
  the 
  context 
  
for 
  understanding 
  how 
  forestry 
  training 
  happens 
  in 
  Finland. 
   
  
Forestry  Training  
The 
  Finns 
  deliberately 
  and 
  with 
  consideration 
  change 
  their 
  forestry 
  curricula 
  and 
  professional 
  training 
  to 
  
keep 
  pace 
  with 
  changes 
  in 
  logging 
  equipment, 
  logging 
  electronics 
  and 
  communications, 
  and 
  general 
  
industry 
  organization. 
  While 
  the 
  technological 
  changes 
  are 
  obvious, 
  more 
  subtle 
  is 
  the 
  change 
  in 
  human 
  
organization 
  around 
  forestry 
  work. 
   
  
In 
  1970, 
  industry 
  organized 
  the 
  wood 
  supply 
  and 
  their 
  foremen 
  did 
  site 
  and 
  harvesting 
  planning 
  and 
  
hiring 
  of 
  fleets. 
  In 
  2017, 
  it 
  is 
  the 
  operators, 
  working 
  for 
  small 
  private 
  harvesting 
  companies, 
  who 
  are 
  
responsible 
  for 
  the 
  quality 
  of 
  logging, 
  production 
  report 
  transmission 
  from 
  their 
  machine 
  to 
  the 
  mill, 
  the 
  
maintenance 
  of 
  their 
  machine 
  and 
  identification 
  of 
  habitats. 
  They 
  are 
  therefore 
  likened 
  to 
  harvest 
  
process 
  instructors 
  and 
  managers 
  rather 
  than 
  as 
  rote 
  machine 
  operators. 
  There 
  is 
  a 
  weight 
  of 
  
responsibility 
  and 
  an 
  elevated 
  sense 
  of 
  regard 
  for 
  forest 
  machine 
  operators 
  in 
  Finland. 
  
Forestry  schools  in  Finland  
According 
  to 
  the 
  Tampere 
  University 
  of 
  Applied 
  Sciences, 
  there 
  are 
  in 
  Finland 
  in 
  2015 
  
•

9 
  institutes 
  to 
  train 
  forest 
  machine 
  operators 
  (out 
  of 
  27 
  vocational 
  institutes 
  in 
  the 
  country) 
   
  
33  

  

 •
•

6 
  universities 
  of 
  applied 
  sciences 
  in 
  forest 
  education 
  where 
  a 
  Bachelor’s 
  Degree 
  in 
  Forestry 
  can 
  
be 
  obtained. 
  Universities 
  of 
  applied 
  sciences 
  are 
  distinct 
  from 
  other 
  universities. 
  
2 
  universities 
  offer 
  Masters 
  and 
  PhD 
  degrees 
  in 
  Forestry 
  

Vocational 
  and 
  university 
  education 
  in 
  Finland 
  is 
  free. 
  
Forest  Concepts  for  Children  and  the  Public  
Nature 
  games 
  and 
  wood 
  use 
  and 
  wood 
  products 
  are 
  used 
  in 
  young 
  children’s 
  programs. 
  Outdoor 
  play 
  
and 
  appreciation 
  is 
  important. 
  Also 
  significantn 
  is 
  the 
  bringing 
  inside 
  of 
  outdoor 
  imagery 
  and 
  wood 
  as 
  a 
  
building 
  material. 
  Images 
  of 
  forest 
  tree 
  species 
  and 
  nature 
  appear 
  in 
  public 
  spaces 
  in 
  the 
  form 
  of 
  murals, 
  
wall 
  panels, 
  sculpture, 
  architecture 
  and 
  art, 
  business 
  and 
  home 
  décor 
  and 
  Finnish 
  brand 
  logos. 
  Nature 
  
imagery 
  seems 
  to 
  be 
  imprinted 
  on 
  the 
  general 
  population 
  this 
  way. 
  The 
  Finnish 
  Forest 
  Association, 
  the 
  
second 
  oldest 
  forest 
  organization 
  in 
  Finland 
  after 
  Metsahallitus, 
  takes 
  on 
  many 
  responsibilities 
  for 
  
outreach 
  to 
  young 
  children 
  and 
  the 
  public. 
  
Youth  entrants  in  forestry  school  
A 
  child 
  may 
  grow 
  in 
  the 
  Finnish 
  education 
  system 
  to 
  select 
  forestry 
  as 
  a 
  career 
  option, 
  starting 
  at 
  age 
  16. 
  
It 
  can 
  be 
  approached 
  two 
  ways: 
  
1. Upper 
  Secondary 
  School 
  & 
  University 
  of 
  Applied 
  Sciences 
  — 
  Students 
  at 
  16 
  years 
  of 
  age 
  can 
  
take 
  matriculation 
  examinations 
  and 
  proceed 
  for 
  three 
  years 
  in 
  a 
  general 
  upper 
  secondary 
  
school. 
  These 
  students 
  can 
  enter 
  the 
  university 
  stream 
  for 
  a 
  Bachelor’s 
  degree 
  in 
  Forestry 
  from 
  
a 
  university 
  of 
  applied 
  sciences 
  which 
  can 
  take 
  another 
  3-­‐4 
  years. 
  They 
  can 
  also 
  choose 
  to 
  enter 
  
the 
  vocational 
  school 
  system 
  at 
  this 
  point. 
   
  
 
  
2. Comprehensive 
  School 
  & 
  Vocational 
  School 
  — 
  From 
  upper 
  secondary 
  school, 
  or 
  more 
  typically 
  
direct 
  from 
  their 
  basic 
  comprehensive 
  schooling 
  at 
  age 
  16, 
  students 
  can 
  enter 
  a 
  vocational 
  
institution 
  to 
  receive 
  vocational 
  qualifications. 
   
  
 
  
Vocational 
  qualifications 
  in 
  Forestry 
  take 
  3 
  years 
  of 
  schooling 
  during 
  which 
  120 
  credits 
  are 
  
accumulated. 
  This 
  is 
  equivalent 
  to 
  the 
  European 
  Qualifications 
  Framework 
  (EQF) 
  system 
  of 
  an 
  
EQF 
  Level 
  4. 
  This 
  assures 
  competence 
  to 
  enter 
  employment 
  in 
  the 
  field. 
  
To 
  receive 
  ‘Qualifications’ 
  in 
  a 
  trade 
  requires 
  periods 
  of 
  on-­‐the-­‐job 
  learning 
  under 
  a 
  written 
  
contract 
  with 
  an 
  accepted 
  company. 
  The 
  student 
  has 
  an 
  on-­‐the-­‐job 
  instructor 
  and 
  they 
  are 
  not 
  
considered 
  an 
  employee. 
  Demonstration 
  of 
  competencies 
  is 
  also 
  arranged 
  in 
  genuine 
  working 
  
environments 
  over 
  the 
  three-­‐year 
  training 
  period. 
  
Students 
  graduate 
  with 
  Qualifications 
  in 
  one 
  of 
  these 
  specific 
  occupations: 
  
e) Forest 
  worker 
  
f) Forest 
  machine 
  operator 
  (harvester/ 
  forwarder) 
  
g) Forest 
  mechanic 
  
34  
  

 h) Timber 
  truck 
  driver 
  
Through 
  work 
  experience, 
  also 
  available 
  as 
  apprenticeship 
  training, 
  students 
  can 
  obtain 
  further 
  
vocational 
  qualifications 
  to 
  be 
  considered 
  a 
  skilled 
  worker, 
  and 
  specialist 
  vocational 
  qualifications 
  to 
  
show 
  they 
  have 
  mastered 
  the 
  most 
  demanding 
  tasks 
  of 
  the 
  job 
  in 
  their 
  field. 
  These 
  levels 
  of 
  training 
  
equate 
  to 
  Europe’s 
  scale 
  as 
  EQF 
  5 
  and 
  EQF 
  5-­‐6. 
  
By 
  comparison, 
  a 
  bachelor’s 
  degree 
  in 
  Forestry 
  is 
  EQF 
  6. 
  
Adult  entrants  in  forestry  
An 
  adult 
  may 
  receive 
  forestry 
  training 
  at 
  a 
  later 
  point 
  in 
  their 
  career, 
  and 
  it 
  can 
  take 
  1-­‐2 
  years. 
  The 
  
process 
  of 
  building 
  qualifications 
  with 
  adults 
  is 
  based 
  mainly 
  on 
  demonstrating 
  certain 
  competencies. 
   
  
The 
  system 
  is 
  regulated 
  by 
  Ministry 
  of 
  Education’s 
  Vocational 
  Education 
  Act 
  and 
  Decree. 
  The 
  Finnish 
  
National 
  Board 
  of 
  Education 
  developed 
  the 
  nation’s 
  Core 
  Curricula. 
  
The 
  Requirements 
  for 
  Competence-­‐Based 
  Qualifications 
  are 
  guidelines 
  set 
  by 
  the 
  Finnish 
  National 
  Board 
  
of 
  Education. 
  This 
  guideline 
  sets 
  out 
  the 
  requirements 
  for 
  the 
  ‘further’ 
  and 
  ‘specialist’ 
  vocational 
  
qualifications 
  noted 
  above. 
  The 
  vocational 
  training 
  modules 
  have 
  been 
  developed 
  with 
  people 
  in 
  the 
  
business 
  of 
  each 
  profession 
  (Subject 
  Matter 
  Experts 
  or 
  SME’s) 
  for 
  real 
  life 
  work 
  tasks. 
  
National 
  qualification 
  requirements 
  are 
  developed 
  collaboratively 
  with 
  employers, 
  trade 
  unions 
  and 
  
student 
  unions. 
  Regardless 
  of 
  the 
  wider 
  structural 
  decisions 
  students 
  have 
  personal 
  study 
  plans. 
  
Breakdown 
  of 
  credits 
  for 
  Vocational 
  Qualifications 
  as 
  a 
  Forest 
  Machine 
  Operator 
  
3 
  years 
  equates 
  to 
  120 
  credits. 
  90 
  credits 
  are 
  in 
  vocational 
  studies, 
  with 
  20 
  credits 
  in 
  common 
  or 
  core 
  
(cross-­‐sector) 
  subjects. 
  10 
  credits 
  are 
  free 
  choice 
  studies. 
  On 
  the 
  job 
  periods 
  have 
  a 
  minimum 
  of 
  20 
  
credits 
  in 
  the 
  vocational 
  studies. 
  
 
  

  
  

  

35  
  

 A PPENDIX   4    —    T YPICAL   F OREST   M ANAGEM ENT   R EGIM E  IN   F INLAND ,    I NVESTM ENTS  
AND   C OST   R ECOVERY   
  
Table  11.  Forest  Investment  costs,  administration  costs  and  stum page  revenues,  2015  
(euros  /  ha)  
Source

Total 
  

Preparation 
  of 
  regeneration 
  areas
Artificial 
  regeneration

Total 
  Cost

Profit 
  
(e/ha)

2.2
2.7

Forest 
  regeneration

4.9
2.7

Tending 
  of 
  seedling 
  stands

Management 
  of 
  young 
  stands

4.7
1.2
0

Improvement 
  of 
  young 
  stands
Pruning
Initial 
  clearings 
  of 
  intermediate 
  
felling 
  areas
Forest 
  fertilisation
Forest 
  ditching
Construction 
  and 
  basic 
  
improvement 
  of 
  forest 
  roads

0.8
0.5
0.6
1.5

Forest 
  improvement

2.7

Forestry 
  fees
Maintenance 
  of 
  forest 
  roads
Other 
  costs 
  (roundwood 
  sales, 
  
education, 
  membership 
  fees 
  etc.)

Forestry 
  administration 
  costs

1.3
0.6
2.6
4.5
16.80

Total 
  costs 
  in 
  wood 
  production
Revenues
Plus 
  State 
  Subsidies
Operating 
  Profit

(16.80)
128.4
4.3
115.9

OSF: 
  Natural 
  Resources 
  Institute 
  Finland, 
  Operating 
  profit 
  in 
  non-­‐industrial 
  
private 
  forestry

  
  
  

  

  

36  
  

 Table  12.  Average  stumpage  rates  by  product,  2015  (cubic  metres)  
Stumpage 
  Price 
  by 
  Treatment 
  
(e/m3)
Regeneration 
   Second 
  
First 
  
felling
thinning
Thinning

Product
Pine 
  l ogs

56.01

47.33

38.58

Spruce 
  l ogs

55.31

46.89

39.24

Birch 
  l ogs

43.44

36.90

33.35

Pine 
  pulpwood

17.30

14.76

11.55

Spruce 
  pulpwood

18.17

15.02

11.05

Birch 
  pulpwood

17.17

14.31

11.47

Small-­‐sized 
  l ogs, 
  pine

24.96

20.55

17.17

Small-­‐sized 
  l ogs, 
  s pruce

24.83

20.23

Source: 
  Na tura l  
  R es ources  
  I ns ti tute 
  F i nl a nd, 
  Vol umes  
  a nd 
  
pri ces  
  i n 
  i ndus tri a l  
  roundwood 
  tra de

  

  

Stumpage 
  Rates, 
  2015 
  (e/ha) 
  
60.00 
  
50.00 
  
40.00 
  
30.00 
  
20.00 
  
10.00 
  
0.00 
  

Regenerazon 
  felling 
  

Thinning 
  

First 
  thinning 
  

  
Figure  10.  Average  stum page  rates  paid  in  Finland  by  product,  2015.  (Source:  Natural  
Resources  Institute  Finland,  Volum es  and  prices  in  industrial  roundwood  trade.)  

  
  

  

37  
  

 6.0    R E F E R E N C E S   
                                                                                                                          

1.  Nova  Scotia  Commission  on  Building  our  Economy, 
  Now 
  or 
  Never: 
  An 
  Urgent 
  Call 
  to 
  Action 
  for 
  
Nova 
  Scotians,  2014,  page  vi  
2.    Forestry  Lab,  Summary  Report,  2017  (http://www.theforestrylab.ca/about.html),  page  3  
3.    ibid.    
4.    Multi-­‐Source  National  Forest  Inventory  of  Finland,  METLA.  
http://www.metla.fi/ohjelma/vm1/infoen.htm  
5.    Finnish  Forest  Research  Institute  National  Forest  Inventory  (NFI).  
http://www.metla.fi/ohjelma/vmi/vmimonien.htm  
6.    National  Forest  Strategy  2025  –  Government  Resolution  of  12  February  2015.  Ministry  of  
Agriculture  and  Forestry  of  Finland.  May  2015  
7.    Sustainable  Forestry  in  Finland:  ENVI  Delegation,  May  2016  
8.  Karppinen,  Heimo,  Maria  Hänninen  &  Lauri  Valsta,  “Forest  ownership  changes  in  Europe:  
trends,  issues  and  needs  for  action.”    Conference:  Forest  ownership  changes  in  Europe:  trends,  
issues  and  needs  for  action.  7-­‐9  September  2016,  Vienna,  Austria  
http://facesmap.boku.ac.at/library/Final_conference_Presentations/Parallel_session_8/Karppinen%20e
t%20al_Forest%20owners%20views%20on%20storing%20carbon.pdf 
  

9.    C02e:  Unit  of  Carbon  dioxide  equivalent.  This  is  the  standard  unit  for  greenhouse  gas  
equivalency  ratios.  Carbon  offset  markets  report  in  C02e.  
10.  North  Savo  Forest  Management  Association  presentation,  Kuopio,  Finland,  September  28,  
2016  
11.    http://www.borealforest.org/world/world_finland.htm  

38