Sirkuspelle…GREAT PICS!…I am a nature lover and bird watcher myself….I love the pristine countryside of Suomi..
Here is a YouTube hyperlink of Torronsouo everyone will like:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6YNPw4iOrg&feature=related

Well, at least this one has something to do with Finland.

Here is a machine for Suomi winters!:
http://www.autoblog.com/2008/08/13/lotus-develops-concept-ice-vehicle-for-antarctic-expedition/

I had perfect weather(i think it was 2001) when i was hiking around Pirunkuru with bunch of friends under scorching sun and not even one mosquito. Ice cold water to drink and swim. Pretty much perfect.

Couple of pics
http://i330.photobucket.com/albums/l409/tissot233/201.jpg
http://i330.photobucket.com/albums/l409/tissot233/130.jpg

We are supposed to have some warm weather on Sunday. So get out and see some nature!

Probably soon under threat because the current government wants to label peat as semi-renewable energy source… But national parks are in any case, contrary of what people believe, not free of human intervention. Logging takes place, almost like it would be any commercial forest.

Dicks.

So yeah, enjoy them while you can!

@6 there are plenty of bogs further north where peat can be extracted. Torronsuo won’t be touched. It is protected, and EU money has gone into it.

Peat can be made into bio-diesel via the Fischer-Troppsch method. It also grows back. One calculation showed that Finland could produce ALL its energy with peat, and it would still renew.

Why do you call people “dicks” when your name for yourself “majava” (beaver) means cunt?

A beaver is an animal. A dick is just a that… a dick.

Now tell me 1. How long would it take to renew? and 2. How many biotopes would you destroy? Finnish nature conservation is a joke and most foreigners buy it because there is so much “nature” (green stuff they see), while in fact all but a few percent is managed. Managed for the wood industry with their self invented certification. The wildlife that lives there is managed. Again not to have a healthy ecosystem, but for the likes of the hunters. Hunters, loggers, farmers. They decide what Finland looks like.

EU money going into some project is no guarantee for preservation. It only shows that there are some capable fundraisers in Finland.

Still, it is not necessary to call people dicks because they like to enjoy nature, Beaver.

Some problems I have noticed:

1. The forests are all very uniform looking. You can’t see very many wild forests. There are a few tens of hectares of wild forest in Liesjärvi National Park near the Korteniemi historical forest ranger ranch. It looks quite different from managed forests.
2. There are very few species of tree in the managed forests. (pine, spruce, birch)
3. Other species can and do grow here, like elm, aspen, linden, ash, oak, rowan. Rowans grow and spread like crazy around where I live.
4. People tend to view some species as useless or as weeds and automatically cut them down. (aspen, alder, rowan)
5. If a bear starts going near the city, it is automatically shot. I don’t think they have heard of tranquilizer darts yet here, or about the possibility of relocating the animal. So young, healthy animals get killed.
6. Crayfish like to eat alder leaves, but when people cut all the alders down so their summer cottage view to the lake isn’t obstructed, then there are not many alder leaves falling into the water to feed them.
7. On the other side of the border in Russia, there are some wild forests, at least until they are cut down and sold to the Finnish paper industry.
8. Some non-native species could be grown here, like douglas-fir. There is a small self-renewing forest of them in Elimäki.
9. I have seem some cultivated larch being grown here, but again they are very managed looking forests. Siberian larch grows wild in Karelia not far from the border.

And I forgot to add:
10. ditches everywhere. People love to dig ditches through their forests so that they are more productive. Certain species of birds sometimes get stuck in the ditches before they learn to fly and can’t get out.

Don’t get me wrong, I do not say that any of you here is a dick, or at least not for now. What I meant is those people who exploit nature to the degree that it harms nature (and in the end also us… but hey, that’s long term) are dicks. Politicians most.

I am fine with logging, hunting and fishing as long as it is done in a proper manner and nobody starts making fairy-tale like stories around them to make it look all so romantic. They are industries with a powerful lobby and there is nothing romantic about it. They see biologists not as useful scientists that can advise them, but as enemies to their livelihood. Look at the ridiculous situation with the Saimaan norppa, a Finnish endemic species for god’s sake that is under threat of extinction. For its survival fishing should be banned in lake Saimaa, but the government refuses to do so to protect the fishermen. Insane!

And something else… Hank just wrote (somewhere else) about cats that eat some nature birds. That is obviously so devastating that we have a hunting law that says we can shoot them. Why isn’t there any paragraph about shooting loggers that cut forests even in the bird breeding season and thus killing every year about 35.000 birds?

I do enjoy the forests, but thanks to my knowledge I am also able to see more than I like and then it can also make me sad.

5. If a bear starts going near the city, it is automatically shot. I don’t think they have heard of tranquilizer darts yet here, or about the possibility of relocating the animal. So young, healthy animals get killed.

Oh my. Dunno about you, but the last bear that got shot was close to city and 1km away from kindergarten. If i had my child in there i would have shot the bear my self.

The problem with bears is that after they no longer fear people they become a threat because they still act unpredictably, like the wild things they are, but they do it in the vicinity of people. Bears who do not fear people cannot be trusted to not go through peoples garbage and maybe even coming to peoples’ yards. They no longer can be relocated, because they will seek residential areas in search of easy food supplies, therefore they have to be shot.

As far as the forestry is concerned, I find it completely useless to complain about the lack of variety in Finland because the humus in finland is simply too poor and acidic to sustain many species of trees. We have to make do with what we have and pining (see what I did there?) for more oak trees and so on is futile.

Sorry FB, but that’s not true (about the forests). Other tree species do grow here and thrive in parks, lawns, and in people’s gardens. In the forests they do grown, but get cut with the first thinning, because they are unsuitable species for the wood and pulp industry. It doesn’t get any more simple than that.

I would like to see just a little bit more protection of certain forest habitats, mainly in the south, where there is least protected nature. And I would like all parties (both luontoliitto and the loggers) to be honest; all forests in Finland are exploited, and real protection means you can’t make money off it, besides perhaps through eco-tourism.

I agree with what you wrote about bears, although I do not think many care to know if it was a bear that got too used to humans or an accidental stray. Most hunters I have spoken to here also have this opinion about the wolves, when you ask them. “They all need to be shot” Aks them why and it’s just “because”. How to argue with that?

When I saw a bear once in the USA up close, we simply went indoors. It was rummaging through the garbage of the cabin. Eventually the bear left, especially when we started making noise from the inside of the cabin. A couple of air-rifle pellets aimed at the animal’s butt, if it still doesn’t leave. There’s also bear spray, which is very effective. It is basically mace and inflicts harsh, but temporary pain to the mucous membranes. (ie mouth, nose, nasal passages, eyes) But there is probably some law against bear spray in Finland, as well as popping an animal in the butt with an air rifle to drive it away without killing it. So probably the only “legal” thing left to do is destroy the animal.

Sirkuspelle:
“A couple of air-rifle pellets aimed at the animal’s butt, if it still doesn’t leave. ”

Not necessarily the smartest idea, although that’s one way to win a Darwin award. Does “perseeseen ammuttu karhu” ring a bell?

A bear (especially a brown bear) is essentially a peaceful herbivore that will generally avoid people. Just make sure you don’t encounter one that has just woken from hibernation (they are not morning animals) or a mother with cubs.

Majava:
“Most hunters I have spoken to here also have this opinion about the wolves, when you ask them. “They all need to be shot” Aks them why and it’s just “because”. How to argue with that?”

Well, there are hunters and then there are huntards.

I like the boardwalk walk way. And it goes on for 3km? Amazing! Someone clearly has both a lot of time on their hands, and cares enough to take the time to lay down 3km of the stuff, just for people to enjoy.

A much better attention of care than we get in the UK.

you went brief regarding those meat eating plants. that sounds interesting. care enough to explain that further since you got a lot of time lying in your hands anyway…