Leonardo da Vinci Programme
A Report on the ARCH Network
Nature Exchange to
LATVIA
26 May – 2 June 2009
Written by Sarah Dalrymple, Paul Hanson, David Millar,
Rose Toney, Laura Whyte and Angus Yarwood.

1
Introduction
The group would like to begin this report by thanking Janis Ozolins, his
colleagues at the Latvian State Forest Service, Vilnis Skuja, Mārtiņš Seržants
of the Food and Veterinary Service, the Slītere National Park, and all the local
guides who showed us around some of western Latvia’s most beautiful places.
We experienced fantastic hospitality and enthusiasm from all our guides. The
Latvian people, their land and its wildlife seemed to express extraordinary
resilience in the face of a turbulent history which last century included two
world wars and lengthy periods of malign, foreign occupation.
We would also like to thank the Leonardo da Vinci programme for funding the
exchange and the Arch Network for planning, organising and facilitating the
exchange. Contact details for these organisations can be found at the back of
this report.
The exchange visited the northwest of the country, starting from Riga and
travelling first to Ķemeri National Park, then up to Slītere National Park and
over to Ziemupe on the west coast. The full itinerary is listed in Annex 1.
The geography and history of Latvia
The Republic of Latvia is located in the Baltic region of Northern Europe. It is
bordered to the north by Estonia, to the south by Lithuania, to the east by the
Russian Federation, and to the southeast by Belarus. Across the Baltic Sea to
the west lies Sweden. Latvia is four-fifths the size of Scotland at 64,589 km².
The land consists of fertile, low-lying plains, largely covered by forest and the
highest point in the country is the Gaiziņkalns in East Latvia, standing at 312
m. Latvia has a population of 2,375,000 people, almost half of which live in
and around the capital city Riga. Annex 2 shows a map of Latvia.
From the mid-16th to the early 18th century, Latvia was partitioned between
Poland and Sweden, but by the end of the 18th century the whole of Latvia
had been annexed by expansionist Russia. German landowners, who had
influenced ownership for the previous three centuries, managed to retain their
influence in Latvia during this period, but indigenous Latvian nationalism grew
rapidly in the early 20th century. Following the Russian Revolution of 1917,
Latvia declared its independence on 18 November 1918, and after a period of
fighting, the new nation was recognized by Soviet Russia and Germany in
1920.
Independent Latvia was governed by democratic coalitions until 1934, when
autocratic rule was established by President Karlis Ulmanis. In 1939 Latvia
was forced to grant military bases on its soil to the Soviet Union, and in 1940
the Soviet Red Army moved into Latvia, which was soon incorporated into the
Janis Ozolins, our guide Evidence of beavers in Kemeri National Park Roman Orthodox church in Liepaja
2
Soviet Union. Nazi Germany held Latvia from 1941 to 1944, when it was
retaken by the Red Army. Latvia's farms were forcibly collectivized in 1949.
Latvia remained one of the most prosperous and highly industrialized parts of
the Soviet Union and its people retained strong memories of their brief 20 year
period of independence. With the liberalisation of the Soviet regime undertaken
by Mikhail Gorbachev in the late 1980s, Latvians began seeking full
independence and this was achieved on 21 August 1991. Latvia joined the
European Union on 1 May 2004.
Today Latvia appears to be very much a modern European democracy which is
moving forward but is still faced with potentially difficult legacies from the
earlier Soviet domination. These problems include deportations of local people,
settlement by ethnic Russians, and previous collectivisation of farmland, all of
which have to some extent severed the link between people and the land. Rundown
and poor quality housing and infrastructure in some towns and villages,
together with abandoned military installations and other communist state
sponsored projects will take resources to remove or improve. Much of the rest
of what we saw as we travelled around was, however, comparable to the rest
of Europe.
Rural depopulation continues as people move from remote and sparsely
populated areas in western Latvia to the bright lights of Riga. The current
economic downturn has left Latvia with some of the most serious economic
problems in the EU, timber prices have been in dramatic decline, and the
consequences are affecting land management organisations and reducing
numbers of both frontline and senior managerial staff. While we were visiting
the amalgamation of directorships in the National Parks was underway and the
State Forest Service is reducing by about half, the number of Regional Forest
Districts.
Despite the flatness of the country and the extent of relatively even-aged
forest cover, there is variety of landscape and habitat variation especially
around habitations, former and current agricultural land, river courses, lakes,
bogs and coastal scarps, cliffs, dunes and beaches much of which has resulted
from dramatic changes in the Baltic shoreline since the last Ice Age.
The forest resource in particular is impressive and despite the absence of oldgrowth
areas and relative uniformity in terms of stand age and height, there
was great variation in tree species, widespread signs of large mammals,
impressive natural regeneration and biodiversity of birds, vascular plants and
invertebrates – and all this in the presence of wild herbivores and in the
complete absence of fencing - a situation in dramatic and welcome contrast to
that in Scotland. A species list from the exchange can be seen in Annex 3.
Former Soviet The group near Kuldgia Ventspils International Radioastronomy Centre housing in Liepaja
3
The grasslands of Lativia
Kemeri National Park
We visited Kemeri national Park on the first day of our exchange. The
diversity of plants and animals was immediately apparent within the
woodlands, bogs and floodplains. Among the many habitats housed
within Kemeri National Park are extensive meadows. These meadows
were once used by the people living here for livestock grazing and hay
production.
In 1997 when the Park was established the meadows had become
overgrown by scrub. Meadows are a relatively small part of the Park, in
order to maintain as diverse a site as possible their maintenance is a
priority.
When the LIFE project was started in 2003 two meadows were mowed –
Dunduru meadows (139.5ha) and Lielupes floodplain meadows
(21.2ha). A year later EU Agri-environment programme funds became
available in Latvia, these have been used to manage these areas. Since
the parks supports natural processes it was decided to mainly use large
herbivores for meadow management.
The Dunduru meadows
It was found that in order to carry out significant and effective
management of these meadows land purchase from private landowners
was necessary. Four plots were purchased from private land owners - a
total of 163.2 ha - along with the 130.5 ha initially owned by the state.
In 2004 with the help of the LIFE project partner WWF 15 Heck cattle
were brought from Belgium and released in Dunduru meadows. A year
later in August 2005 10 Konik horses were brought from Papes.
The addition of these semi-natural grazers was not without its
complications. The cattle were used to milder winters and a cold winter
meant that the calves born in February died. Three adult animals died
due to age and the harsh winter. The cattle seem to have adapted to the
area and three calves have now survived a winter. The horses have also
had one foal survive the winter. During our visit we saw several new
calves and foals, hopefully they will also be long term additions to the
herds.
A total of 66ha of meadows have been cleared of scrub over the Lielupe
floodplain. Scrub clearance will continue in these areas for the next few
years, mowing will be used as part of this management. The long term
aim is to decrease the mown areas and increase the proportion of
Bee hives in Kemeri Four-spotted chaser Drainage channel in Kemeri National Park National Park
4
grazed meadows, thereby achieving the parks vision of a naturally
sustained system of management.
Monitoring of plots within the meadows is being carried out to collate
information on any changes in the vegetation.
Konik horses - descendants of the wild horses that once roamed throughout
Europe, these horses create and maintain natural grasslands through their
grazing activities.
Wild horses, as well as other herbivores such as bison and aurochs have
practically disappeared from the European landscape during the past centuries.
The last known wild horse died in Russia in 1887; without these grazers natural
grassland ecosystems have also been disappearing.
In Latvia 40% of endangered and extinct plants are meadow species. Today
natural grasslands comprise only 1% of Latvia's terrestrial ecosystems.
Historically wild herbivores maintained a mosaic landscape with a greater
abundance of grasslands. Today these meadows are either forested or
converted to fields and pastures, in which many wild herbivores can no longer
be found.
In 1936 a Polish professor - Vitelani - selectively bred domesticated horses that
had retained traits of their wild forbears. This resulted in a new breed named
Konik polski or Polish horse. This species has proved to be similar to its
ancestor the tarpan in both appearance and in its ability to survive in the wild.
With each successive generation, these animals become better adapted to
surviving without human assistance.
Lake Pape
In 1999, WWF Latvia introduced 18 Konik horses to the Lake Pape area, in the
district of Liepaja in southwest Latvia. The horses are kept in a large fenced area.
As of spring 2002 their population had reached 45 animals. It was clear from our
visit that the influence of the grazing provided a range of grassland habitat, from
heavily grazed areas attractive to greylag geese, moderately grazed areas
providing habitat for ground nesting birds, to ungrazed areas full of flowering
plants, butterflies and bees.
Like Kemeri National Park tourism is actively encouraged here, although the aim is
to create a true wilderness people are seen as an integral part of this.
It was encouraging to see these large scale habitats managed through natural
processes. Management still exists to some extent at Lake Pape where
supplementary feeding is used through winter months in order preserve the Konik
horse population. Fences are also used to contain the populations and retain a
diversity of grassland.
Konik horses in Kemeri National Park
5
In the Durnduru Meadows the Konik horses are given no supplementary feeding
and nature is allowed to take its course with a host of predators and scavengers to
help it on its way, although fences also are used here.
Grazing specifically to manage habitats is used to some extent in Britain but
generally this is carried out by domesticated beasts. This is perhaps something we
could build on using the experience of other European countries such as Latvia to
inform our decisions.
The forests of Latvia
Latvia has a long history of commercial forest and woodland management, to
the extent that there is little if any ancient woodland to be found. What can be
seen is a well managed national forest that very deliberately and carefully
balances the population needs from forests and requirements of the varied
wildlife.
Timber is certainly one of the most important of Latvia’s natural resources; as
firewood it used by the vast majority of the population. Timber exports in
excess of 3.6 million m³ make a significant contribution to the national export
income total (for 2008). Timber processing totals 22.4% (the single largest
component) of the national processing sector. Clearly the growing and
harvesting of timber plays an essential part in the cultural and economic
wellbeing of the Republic of Latvia.
The forest area covers an average of 50% of the available land mass, rising to
80% in some areas of which 50% is state owned. The species make up of
these extensive Baltic forests is relatively and surprisingly small, i.e. Scots pine
(Pinus sylvestris) 28.8%, white and silver birch (Betula pubescens and Betula
pendula) 28.2%, Norway spruce (Picea abies)17.4%, white alder (Alnus
rhombifolia) 9.7%, black alder (Alnus glutinosa) 5%, aspen (Populus tremula)
7.7% with the rest made up of other species. In the main the harvesting
rotation operates to a 90-100 year felling cycle with few stands exceeding
150 years of age.
In 2007 the new planting of the national forest comprised 49% Norway
spruce, 38% birch spp., 10% Pine with another 3% from other species. One
particular feature of the new planting is the establishment of spruce plantings
with a nurse crop of aspen. The Latvian Forest Service has noticed a marked
reduction in the incidence of infection of spruce with Heterobasidion annosum
when grown alongside aspen; work continues in the Forest Research Station
to determine the exact nature of this relationship.
Fire has an often negative part to play in the ‘hands on’ forest management.
Forest fires are quite frequent in the Latvian forest estate occurring between
late spring and early autumn averaging 750 individual fires annually. To date
for 2009 the incidences of fires have reached 650 already, due to the very
Woodland in Kurzeme region Woodland along the River Irbe Woodland loss and bank erosion on the River Irbe
6
warm and dry start to the year. The Latvian Forest Service has its own fire
department, relying on the municipal fire crews only in extreme circumstances,
hardly surprising given the national forest area.
Forest habitat conservation is perhaps one of the few positive benefits of the
Soviet occupation. Large tracts of forest were simply ‘off-limits’ to the general
population that had access to felled/planted trees and hunted for various fowl
and mammals. In the new Latvia much has been done to maintain adequate
areas of the national forest estate in the form of nature reserves to ensure
adequate habitat to support sustainable populations of beaver, otter, elk, red
and roe deer, wild boar, fox, lynx, wolf and even bear. Some of these species
are so successful that hunting continues as a means of maintaining healthy
populations; a side benefit of which is hunting tourism which in no way
lessens the visitor experience for the non hunter. The current nature reserve
designations demand a non-intervention policy with regard to vegetation
management; how this will work in the long-term is uncertain but then long
term in the life of trees may be several centuries so time will tell.
Tree cover in the urban forest, domestic gardens, municipal parks and along
highways had an equally fascinating management regime during the Soviet
occupation. A rather unusual reason for planting trees was to hide features
and structures on the ground from the air. This has resulted in a terrific
number of highway trees largely Limes (Tilia spp.), Horse Chestnut (Aesculus
hippocastanum) and Poplars (Populus spp.) the vast majority of which have
been and continue to be more or less ‘Pollard’ managed.
Surprisingly few flowering shrubs were in evidence either in the capital, Riga,
or in rural locations. The most frequent, if not only, flowering shrubs
commonly seen were from the Lilac family (Syringa spp.), with several
cultivars in the University of Latvia Botanic Garden sporting unusual Soviet
style names.
Utility arboriculture seems not to be a specialist discipline in Latvia. The
electricity production and distribution is state owned and the tree issues with
overhead lines seem to be firmly under control, perhaps another hangover from
the Soviet occupation. What is surprising is the manner in which the overhead
lines are supported on timber poles which are in turn supported on concrete
pillars. First, if somewhat fanciful, thoughts were that the short concrete
sections protected the timber poles from beaver attack; it is likely that timber
rotting agents have more of a part to play in this design!
The beavers do cause significant concern for tree health and flooding, even in
the middle of Riga. Horticulturalists responsible for trees in the Riga city and
other municipal parks have to use wire stock fencing to keep the 150,000-
200,000 strong national beaver population away from the amenity trees,
similar in some ways to how we have to protect trees from rabbits.
Park woodland in Kuldiga Old growth trees near Kuldiga University of Latvia Botanic Garden, Riga
7
The veteran and heritage tree population in Latvia is one of quite young trees
when compared to trees in Scotland. The notable trees are mostly oak many in
the region of 250 years old. The ‘Ancestral Oak at Kaive’ is said to be the
largest oak in the Baltics; historically it has been 17m high and 70m wide.
Elsewhere there are collections of protected Junipers (Juniperus spp.), the
Ziemupe Juniper Stand, and one of the most northerly populations of
Hornbeam (Carpinus betulus) in Europe, the Lukne Hornbeam Stand; some 200
years old at the Dunika Heathland. Perhaps significant by their absence are
examples of old yews (Taxus baccata), yew does not seem to occur in any
numbers in Latvia. Of some note is the huge alder in the university’s botanic
garden in Riga, over 1.5m in diameter. No doubt more arboricultural delights
remain to be identified.
Latvia’s protected areas
Despite being a relatively young country politically, Latvia has a long history of
conserving its natural heritage. The first nature reserve was established at
Moricsala, a wooded island, in 1912 when Latvia was part of the Russian
Empire. This was relatively early compared with Western Europe. By
comparison the first state designated National Nature Reserve in Scotland,
Beinn Eighe, was not declared until 1951, although nature reserves such as
Wicken Fen, had been managed in the UK by charities since 1899. Although
we did not visit Moricsala, we did visit another Strict Nature Reserve in Slītere
National Park in the Kurzeme (formerly Courland) region of western Latvia.
Traditionally, nature protection in Latvia was based on the Soviet system (with
its vast land resource) whereby a system of strictly protected refuges or
reserves could compensate for any economic activity elsewhere.
Most protected areas are still on state owned land and more specifically on
land managed by the State Forest Service. We did visit a National Park,
Kemeri, with significant private ownership, unusual for Latvia and although we
were made aware that this has resulted in problems for managers, the absence
of local staff guides meant we could not really explore this issue further.
At Slītere National Park, we heard that the entire territory had been declared a
Special Area of Conservation (SAC), one of 336 Nature 2000 sites in Latvia
covering 11.9% of the land. However, we also heard that declaring the whole
NP as an SAC, including local agricultural land and villages had caused ongoing
bureaucratic problems for park managers and resentment among local people.
Designating such large sites and including land without features of interest
(habitats or species) is something we have actively tried to avoid in Scotland
(and indeed in one rare case, Rum National Nature Reserve, steps are currently
being taken to redefine boundaries to take account of new community
managed land in order to minimise tension).
Special Area of Conservation at Slitere National Park
8
In any case Natura 2000 regulations allow regulatory measures beyond the
boundaries of SACs if features of interest are threatened. European countries
have interpreted the Habitats Directive differently and it may be that Latvia, as
a relative newcomer to the EU, designated whole territories as an expedient
solution to meet its obligations. These Natura sites include four nature
reserves, four national parks, 250 restricted areas, 37 nature parks, nine
protected landscapes, nine natural monuments, and 23 micro-restricted areas.
Grazing herbivores and woodland regeneration
One of the most striking things about Latvia to members of the group involved
in woodland expansion in Scotland was the amount of tree regeneration and
woodland cover in the complete absence of fencing.
It’s not that grazing herbivores are absent, far from it. We saw roe deer
(Capreolus capreolus) daily, sometimes in several locations, red deer (Cervus
elaphus) on two occasions, brown hare (Lepus capensis) once, abundant
evidence of European beaver (Castor fiber) and occasional signs of wild boar
(Sus scrofa). Elk (Alces alces) were also present in small numbers although we
did not see any.
It is also not the case that woodland cover has been continuous – most of
Latvia has been deforested at one time or another and there are no significant
areas of old growth forest left. The reasons for the abundant natural
regeneration are likely to be many and complex but superficially there are a
number of possible contributory factors.
Surprisingly rabbits (Orcyctolagus cuniculus) have never reached or been
introduced to Latvia (although several other non-native animals are present e.g.
racoon dog (Nyctereutes procyonoides), muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus), and
American mink (Mustela vision). Even large Roman land snails (Helix pomatia)
are still abundant following introductions by Catholic monks in the 15th and
16th centuries for consumption during Lent when eating meat was forbidden.
Janis confirmed that Latvians rarely eat them but they are collected annually
and exported back to Mediterranean countries. Rabbits can have a major
detrimental affect on woodland establishment in the Scottish lowlands and
generally have to be fenced out.
It was fairly rare to see domestic animals as we travelled around eastern Latvia
even in agricultural areas with abundant grass. It was explained that cows are
traditionally kept indoors, although we did see a few small herds and scattered
individual animals (as well as two herds of Heck cattle being used for
conservation management). Sheep and goats were even rarer and only seen on
a couple of occasions. Comparative statistics from the mid 1990s in Scotland
show that Scotland’s land area supported 2 million cattle and 9 million sheep
whereas Latvia supported c. 400,000 cattle and less than 50,000 sheep.
Natural and commercial alder regeneration near Kuldiga Evidence of beaver grazing willow Fire damage in Slitere National Park on River Irbe
9
Deer populations tell a similar story. Scotland is home to at least 350,000 red
deer, 350,000 roe deer, and 9,000 sika deer (Cervus nippon) and smaller
numbers of fallow deer (Cervus danna). In contrast Latvia supports 28,000 red
deer, 130,000 roe deer and 14,000 elk. Red deer vanished from Latvia about
a thousand years ago and the current population is a result of escapes from
captive populations in the 19th century (much like sika in Scotland). Elk and
roe deer are native species but whereas we heard that elk numbers in Slītere
have declined recently. Red deer numbers are increasing and experience in
Scotland certainly suggests that an increase or decrease in one herbivore can
have a dramatic opposite effect on another e.g. sheep removal can lead to
increased red deer numbers, and increased red deer culls can result in the
spread of roe deer.
Elsewhere in Latvia elk are increasing and roe deer numbers at least in western
Latvia are increasing fast. The State Forest Service confirmed that they have
had to resort to fencing to protect highly palatable tree species such as aspen.
It is perhaps somewhat ominous that ungulate numbers are increasing, perhaps
as a result of climate change and a consequent reduction in hard winters.
There has also been an increase in the proportion of broadleaves as opposed to
conifers this century, and together with human depopulation in rural areas this
could tip the balance from largely unhindered woodland regeneration towards
regeneration inhibited and then prevented by grazing and browsing herbivores
– a situation that has persisted in Scotland for centuries.
The dramatic differences in annual hunting bags (from the late 1990s) reflect
the relative abundance of these game species (roe deer – Scotland 30,500,
Latvia 2,100; red deer- Scotland 61,600, Latvia 2,700; elk – Scotland not
present, Latvia 1,000). Perhaps they also indirectly reflect the presence of
large predators in Latvia (wolf, Canis lupus and lynx, Felix lynx) and their
complete absence from Scotland. Although populations of these top predators
are probably not high enough to significantly affect herbivore numbers.
Of course all this abundant woodland regeneration is not necessarily a good
thing for the natural heritage and biodiversity. We drove along gravel roads for
miles through sizeable areas of even aged Scots pine (and more rarely Norway
spruce) that resembled plantation forestry with only occasional glimpses of
farm steadings and meadows – many apparently abandoned either during
Soviet collectivisation or subsequently as people leave the countryside to seek
a ‘better’ life in Riga and presumably beyond. The loss of these meadows is
causing some considerable concern. However, the extent of the resource and
loss needs to be kept in context – the corncrake is a bird largely dependent on
traditionally managed meadows and has declined in Scotland to c. 600 calling
males whereas the estimated Latvian population is 26,000 – 38,000.
We also heard about earlier attempts to drain many of Latvia’s extensive
plateau raised bogs, and saw for ourselves a canalised river that has been
restored to recreate more natural meanders and a floodplain. Drainage has of
Forest view from the top of Ventspils International Radioastronomy Centre
10
course resulted in bogs drying out and whereas we saw very natural looking
bog woodland surrounding a bog pools, we also saw a large bog which had
been partially drained and was covered in small pine trees (albeit ones that had
subsequently been killed in an enormous forest fire).
Extensive, and for long periods neglected, forestry drainage networks
throughout highly connected woodland have provided perfect conditions for
beaver, another herbivore with a potentially damaging influence on tree
establishment. Although the general view from Nordic and Baltic countries is
that the combined effects of ungulate and beaver feeding do not prevent tree
regeneration, riparian woodland is much more fragmented in Scotland and deer
numbers much higher. It remains to be seen how this will work out with the
beavers released in Scotland as part of a controlled reintroduction while we
were in Latvia.
Local communities in conservation
Across Europe it is becoming increasingly apparent that decision making is no
longer the sole domain of conservation organisations (both governmental and
non governmental) when dealing with our natural heritage; policy and
implementation require consultation with a wide range of stakeholders. In
particular, the role of local communities in this process is becoming more
widely accepted, respected and, indeed, essential.
In view of these developments, it was particularly interesting to witness how a
young democratic country was addressing this changing perspective in
conservation management.
Within the Kurzeme region is the territory of Livonia, an area which traces its
roots to ancient Finnish and Baltic cultures. Livonia has its own language,
although spoken by only a very small number of inhabitants. The Livonian
Coast, an area within Livonia created in 1992, is also afforded cultural
protection by the Latvian government, preventing the alteration of historical
sites and discouraging the settlement of non Livonian citizens.
Several Livonian fishing villages are located within Slītere National Park and
whilst visiting the Park, we were given a tour of an area within the park by the
director, Dace Samite. This visit gave us an opportunity to discuss the
difficulties, both unique and universal, faced by the director and other
members of staff in trying to implement Natura 2000 and respect the socioeconomic
concerns of local people.
With residential properties within the fishing villages attracting a high market
value due to their coastal location, Livonia faces a problem which is not
unknown to several areas of Scotland; many affluent absentee landlords are
largely unconcerned with preserving both the cultural heritage and the natural
environment of surrounding areas. In addition, many young people are leaving
Discussion about community engagement Slitere Lighthouse Visitor interpretation boards at Slitere Lighthouse
11
the villages attracted by the benefits of work and leisure in more populated
areas. This leaves a dwindling population to implement and monitor
conservation programmes, and with little money available for the National Park
to make up the shortfall, preservation of natural heritage is an obvious
struggle.
The economic problems faced by the Livonian people also pose a potential
conflict with conservation. With an area of the park completely closed to the
local community due to its high conservation status, the loss in potential
revenue from harvesting and game presents an obviously contentious difficulty
when there are not many other financial opportunities available.
Dace also highlighted the fact that some of the local community view the
National Park staff as a dictatorial force; with a long history of occupation
dating back to the 13th century, it is easy to see how local Livonian people
may be resistant to practices required under the Natura 2000 legislation.
Clearly efforts have been made by the National Park to draw the local
community towards a conservation focus. Several trails are marked by
interpretation boards and historic landmarks such as Slītere Lighthouse, which
is used as an education centre. The centre highlights the importance of the
National Park’s high biodiversity and depicts many of the key species with
accompanying information.
Educating children is essential for the future of conservation, and, as seen in
these accompanying pictures, the decoration of the lighthouse by local children
may help in moving conservation practices forward in the future by giving
them an insight into the importance of local flora and fauna.
Woodland trails near Kuldiga
During the fourth day of our trip, we were given a guided trip through a private
nature trail by a local forester. The trail contained many excellent interpretation
elements, much of it inspired by Latvian poet Musu Baltais Vilks and created
simply using natural materials. This achieved a most effective and inspiring
form of interpretation.
Further into the woods was an enchanted (and certainly enchanting) forest
with a church, picture gallery and play area for “children of all ages” which
had been built over a period of eight years following the return of the land to
our guide’s family after independence.
Although the trail was primarily built for family and friends, our guide told us
that it was regularly used as an educational tool for local school groups
detailing much of the flora and fauna found in the forest. This beautiful trail, so
proudly crafted, offered an excellent opportunity for a collaborative effort
Playing crazy Woodland interpretation point Woodland bowling ally golf in the woods
12
between the government and the local community to simultaneously develop
conservation and ecotourism programmes.
Although clearly efforts were being made to include local communities in the
management of conservation areas, these were subject to a number of
constraints such as culture, economics and historical events. The fact that
these relationships were being established at such a pace in the face of very
recent independence was remarkable. Perhaps the establishment of a more
diverse range of non-governmental organisations (NGOs), which currently have
a largely consultative role, might facilitate a stronger role for local communities
in the conservation process. The introduction of more forest schools may also
prove invaluable in fostering stronger links.
Constraints to conservation in Latvia
Much of what the group experienced during the exchange was very different
to Scotland and the UK more broadly; not least the history of land ownership,
the landscape and some fauna. However, with increasing alignment with
Europe there are also some very familiar issues. Here we highlight how the
situation in Latvia both parallels and contrasts with that in the Scotland and
the UK.
Expansion of transport infrastructure
On route from Riga to Kemeri National Park, Janis described how the
government is planning to expand the main road from Riga to the Kurzeme
district. This will involve adding extra lanes to the road and will create an even
wider barrier to wildlife crossing from one forest segment to another.
Effectively this would mean that the Park would be divided into two isolated
parts. In a consultation process Janis was invited to provide comment on this
proposal. His recommendation was that the road should be elevated for a
significant distance in order to allow the forest to grow continuously
underneath (or at least, a shrubby community might be allowed to persist).
Alternatives such as habitat bridges, whereby a wide bridge covered in woody
species would be placed across the road, were then discussed amongst the
group. It was not known how effective these bridges are as they have not
been used in the UK and no-one knew any details of their effectiveness in
countries such as the Netherlands and Germany. The consensus amongst the
group was that any option was going to be costly and therefore, not a popular
proposal with the Latvian Government.
A similar issue was raised later in the trip when Janis described the proposal to
build a high speed rail link from Riga to destinations across Europe. Again, this
would become a barrier to wildlife migration and given the distances involved,
might have serious consequences for the dispersal of lynx, wolf and elk
Gulf of Riga coast near Kolkasrags Log cabin in the woods at Ziemupe Waterfall in Kuldiga
13
amongst others. This raises an interesting debate – in the UK we view rail
travel as the environmentally friendly option, but our rail networks have been
in existence for much longer than those in other countries. However, the
creation of a new rail link across Latvia is being considered in more
ecologically aware times and is not a debate that was considered when
railways expanded in the UK.
Development of coastal regions
The Slītere National Park serves to protect the natural and cultural landscape
occupied by the Livonians, no management plan exists for the region and this
causes problems because the staff of the Park have no formalised plans which
they can direct inhabitants and developers to. This means that staff of the
Park spend more time assessing planning proposals and the bureaucracy
hinders the work of monitoring and managing the natural diversity of the area.
This direct constraint to conservation practice is also added to by the ‘bad
feelings’ on the part of the local inhabitants, some of which like outside the
park and are local on a seasonal basis. When faced with seemingly endless
bureaucracy, it is easy for people to feel that conservation is a bad thing.
Hunting
The interesting thing about hunting in Latvia is that although in many ways it
could be expected to be a constraining factor for conservation, in fact, hunting
activity can actively promote the existence of many species when hunting is
controlled by permits that limit the ‘bag’. Many game species underwent a
massive population decline across Latvia in the years following independence
from Soviet occupation. This was because the hunting control system was still
being developed and in a period of political change and unsettlement, many
people over-exploited their own land that had been newly re-assigned to them.
At this point, hunting did constrain conservation. However, hunting is now
actively promoted by hunting clubs who require minimum areas of land to be
able to hunt large game species such as elk and the bag count is set and
administered by the State Forest Service.
Closing comment
This report has provided some comment on an information packed visit to
Latvia. We learnt far more than we can express here but it is fair to say that
Scotland and Latvia share many interesting problems and successes in nature
conservation. In changing economic times we hope that Latvia and the people
we met during our visit, continue to be able to manage and care for a rich
natural resource for future generations.
Sunset on the beach at Laikas
14
ANNEX 1 – Trip Itinerary
Date Location and activity Overnight location
26 May - Arrive Riga airport, met by J. Ozoliņš. Riga City, Avalon
Hotel
(www.hotelavalon.eu)
27 May - Travel to Ķemeri National Park
(www.kemeri.gov.lv), local guide
(ornithologist, nature photographer J. Ķuze)
The main topics of excursions will be:
challenges balancing between conservation
goals and interests of private land owners (the
national park is established considering nature
values rather than land property); bird habitat
maintaining by grazing; beavers and wetlands.
Introduction with conservation policy within
NATURA 2000 network, focus on the coastal
lagoon lakes (Kaņieris).
Overnight and dinner
in a guest house
(www.dizpriedes.lv)
28 May - Excursions J. Ozoliņš & local guides
(zoologist V.Skuja)
Visit to a former soviet military space defence
facility.The main topics of excursions will be:
brief history of W-Latvian region Kurzeme
[Courland]; coastal fishermen villages; natural
coastal habitats, National Park Slītere
(www.Slītere.gov.lv)
Overnight in a Guest
House
(www.pitagi.lv)
29 May - Canoe trip along River Irbe. Topic of the
excursion: forest protection along natural
water courses, species richness.
Overnight in a Guest
House
(www.pitagi.lv)
30 May - Introduction with a district forestry work.
Topic of the discussion: structure and tasks
of the local SFS staff. Guide O. Demiters
(forest ecologist)
- Walk in a forest: looking for exciting
habitats, footprints and scats of wolves,
lynx, otters, beavers etc.
- Excursion to the historical town Kuldīga.
Overnight in a coastal
Guest House
(www.laikas.lv )
31 May - Visit to a border town of the former USSR
Liepāja (www.karostascietums.lv). Soviet
rules and their 50 year domination
consequences in Latvia. Understanding of
invincible Latvian spirit.
- Visit to Lake Pape
Overnight in a coastal
Guest House Laikas
1 June - Introduction with the Headquarters State
Forest Service (www.vmd.gov.lv )
B. Rotberga, J. Baumanis, R. Bērmanis
- General structure of the forestry sector in
Latvia and role of the SFS within it.
- Museums, sight seeing in Riga
Riga
(www.hotelavalon.eu)
2 June - Depart back to Scotland
15
ANNEX 2 – Species list
Trees
Aspen Populus tremula Oak sp.
Black alder Alnus glutinosa Poplars Populus spp.
Hazel Corylus avellana Rowan and Whitebeam sp.
Hornbeam Carpinus betulus Scots pine Pinus sylvestris
Horse Chestnut Aesculus hippocastanum Silver birch Betula pendula
Juniper White alder Alnus rhombifolia
Limes Tilia spp. White birch Betula pubescens
Maple sp. Wych Elm Ulmus glabra
Norway spruce Picea abies Yew Taxus baccata
Mammals
Brown hare Lepus capensis
European beaver (signs of) Castor fiber
Red deer Cervus elaphus
Roe deer Capreolus capreolus
Wild boar (signs of) Sus scrofa
Birds
Barn swallow Grey heron Sandwich tern
Bittern Greylag goose Sedge warbler
Black kite Hen harrier Shelduck
Black tern Herring gull Skylark
Black woodpecker Hobby Sparrowhawk
Blackbird Honey buzzard Spotted flycatcher
Black-headed gull Hooded crow Starling
Blue tit House martin Swift
Chaffinch House sparrow Teal
Chiffchaff Icterine warbler Tree pipit
Common buzzard Jackdaw Whinchat
Common sandpiper Jay White stork
Common tern Kestrel White/pied wagtail
Coot Kingfisher Whitethroat
Cormorant Lapwing Whooper swan
Corncrake Lesser spotted eagle Willow tit
Crane Lesser whitethroat Willow warbler
Cuckoo Linnet Wood pigeon
Feral pigeon Magpie Wood warbler
Fieldfare Mallard Woodlark
Goldcrest Marsh harrier Wren
Goldeneye Mute swan Yellowhammer
Goldfinch Osprey
Goosander Pied flycatcher
Great egret Raven
Great tit Red-backed shrike
Green sandpiper Redshank
Greenfinch Redstart
17
ANNEX 3 – Sponsor’s contact details
Arch Network
Olney Bank
The Ross
Comrie
Perthshire
PH6 2JU
Telephone: +44 (0)1764 670653
Website: www.archnetwork.eu
Leonardo da Vinci Programme
European Commission
DG Education and Culture
Unit B5 - Leonardo da Vinci
Mado 11/45
1049 Bruxelles
Email: eac-unite-b5@ec.europa.eu
Website: http://ec.europa.eu/education/lifelong-learningprogramme/
doc82_en.htm