According to Article 53 of the Constitution of the Estonian Republic, everyone has a duty to preserve the human and natural environment and to compensate for the damage caused to the environment.
The last 50 years of imbalanced economic relations brought about a lag in technique and technology and prodigality in the use of natural resources. Several questions and conflicts about the exploitation of land and other facets of nature emerged because of the lack of previous attention to these issues at the level of national policy. The environment was also heavily polluted by the former Soviet Union army, and bringing residual pollution from this source under control may take a few decades more.
In 1989 the Supreme Soviet of the Estonian Soviet Socialist Republic passed a decree entitled “The Conception of Nature Protection and Rational Exploitation of Natural Resources” that assessed the environmental status quo, set the goals and aims of environmental protection and determined the ways of their realisation, still within in the framework of State-owned economy and State-guided social development.
As a result of this decree, changes in the economic and social regime did not involve alterations in environmental goals and, aims, but since then the means and terms for their achievement have changed a lot. Estonia is now on its way from a State-controlled and planned economy to that of liberal free market, and this transformation has important implications for the way environmental issues are envisaged and the way environmental policy is carried out.
Environmental policy in Estonia now centres around a number of recent legislative acts of environmental protection and utilisation that were approved mostly in the years 1992 to 1995. National environmental policy is carried out through the application of strategic directives and specific action plans (biodiversity, water protection etc.). Thus environmental policy has been articulated by the Parliament and managed by the Executive Branch of Government, and it has been generally endorsed by-Estonian society. The underlying basic assumption of this policy is that without jeopardising the interests of future generations we can satisfy all the needs of today, provided that businesses, households and governmental units respect the limits set by nature and by the policy guidelines.
Policy on the taxation of the exploitation of natural resources and that of environmental pollution has laid a foundation for environmental protection being integrated with economy. In part due to the revenues generated by these taxes, in 1996 the budget of the Estonian Environmental Fund (EEF) was 85 million EEK. The activities of the EEF have been considered successful. However, in order to solve environmental problems, it will be necessary for large investments to continue to be made from the Government's budget, by enterprises, local governments and special funds. Significant contributions from abroad have been of great help.
The sources of potential pollution from agriculture occur both in particular locations (point sources) and in scattered locations (nonpoint, or diffused, sources). In Estonia, most of the pollution arising from both kinds of sources can be classified an analysed in terms of four basic categories: fertilisers, pesticides, manure from livestock farms, and stored fuels and miscellaneous wastes.
Up to the year 1990 the main tendencies observed in agriculture were the expansion and intensification of production. Increasing amounts of mineral fertilisers and pesticides were used per hectare. Animal husbandry in its concentrated form added the most to point pollution. In the countryside manure management was and is a constant threat to surface and ground water. Very often manure storage facilities are out of order or missing entirely. The leaching of residual pollution from earlier over-fertilisation and excessive concentration of effluent from livestock farms causes eutrophication of water supplies. Abandoned storage facilities for pesticides and hazardous chemicals are also a constant threat to the environment. Deteriorated drainage structures have become environmental problems as well.
By the middle of 1990s, compared to 1980s, the volume of agricultural production had decreased very substantially, and thus the impact of agriculture on the environment was materially reduced. However, if the agricultural economy recovers, as hoped, the potential exists for a recurrence of the pollution problems experienced previously.
Intensive use of mineral fertilisers in recent decades brought about substantial diffused pollution in agricultural landscapes. In i988, on average, 2888.8 kilograms of mineral fertilisers per hectare were used (100% active ingredient content). Research carried out in Estonia has shown that plants make use of only 26% of nitrogen, 12% of phosphorus and 8% of potassium applied (Mander and others, 1993). Most of the fertilisers leach into groundwater and go into the atmosphere. Diffused pollution had caused extensive eutrophication of surface waters and pollution of groundwater. The latter has been an especially serious problem in Northern and Central Estonia. However, during the last 5–6 years the application of mineral fertilisers has been considerably cut down. We might say that compared to 1988 by 1995 the amount of fertilisers applied on one hectare of arable land had decreased more than 6 times.
At present diffused pollution is less of a problem. Compared to 1980 the conditions of most surface water bodies have significantly improved. This is true also of the lower reaches of the rivers Selja and Põduste. To some extent the state of heavily polluted rivers (Keila, Loobu, Rannapungerja, Valgejõgi, Võhandu, Pedeli) has improved. In some places groundwater is contaminated by nitrates and oil products. It has been mainly in Central and West Estonia that agricultural production has been responsible for a large content of nitrates in groundwater. However, as lots of former sewage treatment plants (purifying stations) have been closed down, the conditions of several inland small rivers and lakes have worsened.
The application of herbicides and insecticides containing highly toxic and allergic substances was characteristic of agricultural technology of the Soviet period. In Estonia the use of plant protection products expanded at the end of the 1950s. A peak was reached in 1986 when 2067 tons of pesticides were used (1 kg of pesticides per hectare). By quantity herbicides have been used most (78 to 80% of all pesticides), followed by fungicides (10 to 12%), seed dressing products (4 to 6%), and insecticides (2 to 5%). In recent years the amount of pesticides applied has diminished significantly. In 1985 the amount applied had fallen to 0.216 kg/h. This figure is considerably below the corresponding level in Western Europe. Estonia has given up the application of several very toxic insecticides. Most of the pesticides currently used can be characterised as non-hazardous for the environment.
In 1985, there were 286 large cattle units in Estonia, with about 566 head on average. The biggest pork processing plants (Viiratsi and Pämu) produced annually 4,500 and 6,500 tons of meat respectively.
Intensive animal husbandry farms concentrated in certain locales brought about several pollution problems, mostly caused by the absence of manure storage units, drawbacks in methods of dung spreading, and inadequate spreading machinery. In the 1970s, farms were built without manure storage units, and the units built later did not meet the requirements of environmental protection. In 1989, one third of the manure produced was of good quality, 30–40% of the manure produced was not up to the mark and the losses amounted to 30%. Large amounts of slurry from pork processing plants polluted the whole neighbourhood around each plant.
By 1995, the number of livestock had decreased by half and the livestock farms were more scattered:
the number of cattle diminished 55% (cows 25%). In 1990, the national herd size was was 757,800 head, among them 280,700 cows; in 1995 the corresponding figures were 419,500 and 211,400.
The number of pigs fell by 52% (from 959,900 in 1990 to 459,800 in 1995.
With the withdrawal of Soviet military troops, the launching of agricultural reform and land reform, and the intensifying privatisation, a new problem in connection of the contamination of soil has arisen: The Central Government is responsible for cleaning up residual pollution remaining from the previous era.
Soil contamination can be caused by the following factors:
Fuel storage tanks (for petroleum products and oil shale oils), dumps (hazardous waste) and former primitive asphalt concrete works that did not satisfy the environmental requirements.
Storage dumps for farm wastes.
Discarded chemicals in abandoned storage facilities for pesticides and herbicides.
Old storehouses that have been abandoned and are falling into disrepair.
The dumping of wastes, including domestic and hazardous waste any place, not in designated dumps.
The soils in Ida-Viru and Harju Counties are in the worst condition. The vicinity of Tallinn, Tapa, Rakvere and Tartu follow close behind.
About 66% of the arable land is drained. This activity has a direct influence on soil structure and its water and air content. In spite of the wide range of amelioration works and their positive effects, the drainage system on thousands of hectares has not been up to the mark and a lot of lands have started to become marshy. Over 50% of the drainage system was constructed 20- 25 years ago and is in need of reconstruction, otherwise by the year 2000 about 40% of them will be unfit for use. Amelioration causes serious environmental problems in the form of soil erosion and wind erosion, as well as promoting the leaching of fertilisers, pesticides and other pollutants from the ground into water supplies. It has changed the structure of the Estonian landscape and has diminished ecological diversity.
Recent decades of amelioration and use of mechanised cultivation techniques have created a landscape of wide plains and straight contour lines. Lands not suitable for cultivation were abandoned and soon covered by brushwood. Instead of the former pattern of small farms separated by woods and hedges, huge flat plains and cultivated pastures came to cover the landscape, especially in Upper Estonia. Brushwoods were almost as widely spread. On the one hand, the area under fields has increased, and on the other hand about half of the previous fields have become afforested.
The extensive efforts at land amelioration after World War II brought about other changes in the pattern of exploitation of arable land. Instead of continuing to use long-cultivated land, more emphasis was laid on cultivating borderlands (natural pastures, marshes and wetlands). The Government's policy favoured reclaiming new lands. In some cases, it resulted in the heart of agricultural estates being abandoned and overgrown with bushes while new virgin lands were being upturned (Palang, 1994).
Soil is the basis of agricultural production. The quality and fertility of soils differs in different parts of Estonia. The amount of fertile soils is limited, and most of them have been exploited already and the imperative need for their protection and preservation should be evident. Reasonable and sensible utilisation of fertile soils is one of the primary requirements for adequate soil protection.
As noted, socialist collectivisation dramatically changed the structure and technology of land use. One third of the arable lands, and in some places (Haanja and Otepää Uplands, Sörve peninsula) even more than half of the cultivated fields, were abandoned. Fresh ground was broken in the newly reclaimed areas and wetlands and marshes were drained. Intensive soil tilling practices on sandy loams and peaty soils caused wind erosion, and harsh tilling on sloping lands gave rise to extensive water erosion. Districts covering about 105,800 hectares of the Estonian territory (mainly Vooremaa and uplands in the southeastern part of the country) are prone to erosion and cannot be left to the mercy of precipitation and melted snow and ice. Another 542,900 hectares may suffer from wind erosion (especially Western Estonian Lowlands and the islands) and large-scale land cultivation is prohibited there.
Fish stocks are naturally renewable resources and the abundance of fish depends on their surroundings. As the spawning areas for most of the fish extend along the coast, the quality of coastal waters is of utmost importance. We can say that in the recent years the quality of water in coastal areas and inland bodies of water has improved somewhat. This can be explained by the decline in agricultural production but also by the construction of sewage treatment facilities in the Baltic Sea catchment basin.
Powan and smelt stocks are in depression. The number of ground fish, less important from a commercial point of view but having a definite place in the ecosystems, has decreased considerably. In inland bodies of water sheatfish and grayling are on the verge of extinction. Sprawning areas for salmon have survived only in the following rivers: the Valgejöe, the Kunda, the Loobu, the Pirita, the Keila and the Vasalemma.
The size and location of many fish stocks is liable to change. It is very difficult to estimate the size of a fish stock and therefore relative stock sizes are usually determined. Rather high quotas for Baltic herring, sprat, cod and salmon indicate the existence of sufficient stocks for these species. In 1995, the quota for the Baltic herring was 568,000 tons, for cod 1,286 tons, sprat 51,500 tons and salmon 101 tons. This meets the demands of the Estonian domestic and allows exports as well. For Baltic herring 77% of the quota was utilised; for cod, 82%; and for sprat, 25%. In the near future the size of fish stocks and total amounts of catch are expected to equilibrate. The development of coastal fisheries has a growing impact on coastal ecosystems. Inland bodies of water provide less than 5% of the total catch (in 1995, 2,365.1 tons).
Fish farms use up to 149 millions of m3 of water a year (about 8.5% of total water consumption). According to the operating permits and agreements, this water is considered to be clean and it is fed back into the water bodies without any treatment The annual production of fish farms is about 350 tons of commercial fish. Since fish harvests per head are lower in Estonia than in neighbouring countries, application of modern technology in fish farming makes it possible for us to increase our supply of fish and meet our international commitments.
Estonian coastal waters include a part of the Gulf of Finland and the Gulf of Riga, Väinameri and the open sea surrounding the islands of Saaremaa and Hiiumaa. Most of the population lives along the coast and thus also most of the industry is located there or in its vicinity. This explains high pollution loads as huge quantities of domestic and industrial waste pour into the seas. Rivers discharging themselves into the seas add to pollution problems.
Still, a decrease in the marine pollution load has been observed in recent years. Due to the decline in production and the number of sewage treatment and water purification plants put into operation, the following declines in the pollution load of coastal waters have been noted: 75% of BOD, 50% of phosphorus, and 40% of nitrogen. Launching the Tallinn purification station has had a significant role in improving the environmental conditions in the Bay of Tallinn.
Nonetheless, as a whole the state of sea water in the Gulfs of Finland and Riga is still a lot worse than that in the other regions of the Baltic Sea. This applies especially to the nitrogen content. Nutrient inflows to the Gulf of Finland are about 5 times as high as that to the other parts of the Baltic Sea. The lion's share of this inflow can be attributed to St. Petersburg. The biggest point source of pollution on the northern coast of Estonia is the filtration water from the Sillamäe sewage treatment plant. The Tallinn sewage treatment plant also eliminates only 25% of the nitrogen.
Thus, in spite of the progress made in recent years, it is important to continue the efforts to improve the condition of coastal waters.
Biodiversity is one of the greatest natural resources in Estonia. We can boast of genetic variability and a strong and viable population of several species that are endangered in other parts of Europe, e.g. bear, wolf, lynx, greyleg geese, bumblebees, etc. The gene fund of local animal breeds and plant varieties is considered satisfactory.
About 5,000 species of planta, 3,000 of fungi, 1,100 of invertebrates and 500 of vertebrates have been recorded in Estonia. Currently 539 species are under protection, including 210 species of plants, 30 of mushrooms and 299 of animals. Ten of the species under protection in Estonia have been entered on the pages of the IUCN Red Data Book. Some of these species (European mink, Atlantic sturgeon) are extremely rare, some (white-tailed eagle, leech and white-fronted goose) rarely seen, some (barnacle goose) are migratory and others (negro ant, corn crake) are actually quite common in Estonia.
The goal of species protection is to preserve the viability and vitality of the local species population. The means are promotion of appropriate kinds of industrial and agricultural development and enforcement of laws that protect biodiversity.
Estonia enjoys variety in landscapes. They are renewable and their structure is comparatively good in spite of the abovementioned problems with soil management. We have 4 national parks and 217 other protected areas (about 10% of the mainland). Soviet restrictions on activities in coastal area have had a positive impact on their natural conditions when compared to the other European nations, and the presence of undisturbed coastal lands is another interesting feature of our natural endowment. This situation should be maintained. However, new legislation (especially the Land Reform Law and the Property Law) may trigger processes which threaten biodiversity and long established landscapes, unless appropriate safeguards are put into place.
One of the trends in land use dynamics has been landscape polarisation. The tendency has been toward a reduction of arable land and an increase in afforestation. This century the share of tilled lands in the total has diminished from 65% in 1900 to 33% in 1992 (ascribed to shrinking natural pastures and grasslands); at the same time forested lands grew from 14% to 44% of the total. This trend has been especially pronounced in recent years. Statistics show a 16% decrease in agricultural land use in the period 1990–1995. Consequently, our scientists confront a new problem: long used farmlands are abandoned and overgrown with weeds. According to the statistics in 1995 about 254,000 hectares of arable land was in an abandoned state.
Compared to the other European countries, the state of landscape diversity and its network on different levels can be considered to be fairly good. Over the last decades a network of massive support areas (major nature reserves, bogs and forest areas) connected by ecologically less intensive areas have emerged. With the present national emphasis on economic recovery and growth, maintaining such infrastructure may be difficult, so awareness of its importance should be raised.
New road and communication networks tend to fragment the existing landscapes. The density of population is expected to rise in the countryside, along the roads. Undisturbed and fragile coastal land should be protected from intensive construction. In spite of the Act on Protection of Marine and Freshwater Coasts, Shores and Banks that provides preconditions for maintaining semi-natural habitats, the islands in Western Estonia and the surroundings of Tallinn still witness an expansion in construction activity. In addition, exploiting peat as a local source of energy can bring about extensive changes in bogs and marshes.
Genetic diversity, or biodiversity, in agriculture can be divided into the two spheres concerned with field crop husbandry and animal husbandry. Forestry belongs to the first group. Gene technology stands a bit aside but it is also related to plant and animal breeding.
Already at the end of Stone Age primitive crop growing reached the regions of Estonia. During the Bronze Age land cultivation gained more and more ground. The Iron Age saw the rise of crop production along with cattle breeding. Purposeful fruit-tree growing dates back to the 13th century. Of all these very early local varieties no samples have preserved. For quite a long time seed production of field crops and vegetables was mainly based on imported varieties and later - in the process of crop growing - adapted varieties, or directly on the import of certified seeds. Most of the fruit and berry varieties grown in Estonia at present have been bred only in this century. One of the oldest preserved grain varieties is rye 'Sangaste', selected and bred by the owner of the Sangaste estate, Friedrich Berg (1845 – 1938).
Successful field crop breeding started with the founding of the Jõgeva Plant Breeding Institute in 1920. During the years of its existence about 240 varieties have been developed there. More than a, half of them are grains and legumes, a quarter of them forage grasses, 45 are potato cultivars or varieties, and 30 are vegetable varieties (peas, beans, white cabbage, carrots, onions, radishes, tomatoes). Research also has been carried out on fibre flax, hemp, poppy, forage root crops, strawberry, gooseberry, apple and black currant, and a number of local varieties of those crops have been produced. By April of 1996 the Jõgeva gene bank had accumulated a collection of 965 different cultivars and varieties (seeds, bulbs and tubers).
At the Kuusiku Experimental Station extensive work on vegetable selection was carried out during the years 1924 to 1970. This station can boast of developing a variety of winter wheat and one each of white melilot, white cabbage, radish and rutabaga.
The brightest period in fruit and berry selection started after World War II when breeding specialists started their experiments on the Polli Experimental Farm. At this farm, 15 apple varieties were created and 1 of pear, 14 of plum, 3 of sweet cherry, 2 of strawberry, 4 of raspberry, 8 of black currant and 1 of gooseberry. Amateurs also contributed their share of effort and developed several good fruit and berry varieties.
There is no national gene bank in Estonia. Decorative plants excluded, the gene collections are mostly preserved in the Jögeva Plant Breeding Institute, the Polli Experimental Station, the Estonian Plant Technology Research Centre and the Research Institute of Plant Biotechnology EVIKA. The Nigula State Nature reserve has a collection of 760 cranberry accessions that have been used actively in cranberry breeding.
There are only two indigenous livestock species' preserved up to now. They are the Estonian Native Cattle and Estonian Native Horse. Both of them have been entered on the World Watch list as endangered species. Estonian Native Cattle have populated this region from ancient times and have served as progenitors for breeding other Estonian cattle (e.g. Estonian Black and White Cattle Breed, Estonian Red Cattle Breed). In the years of Soviet power the numbers of the small (400–480 kg) Estonian Native Cattle decreased from 12,799 (in 1945) to 620 (1994).
The Estonian Native Horse moved to this area with our ancestors. Its predecessors are the cocktailed wild horses of Europe and the Asian-Mongolian breeds. Up to the 18th century it was the only breed in this region. The Estonian Native Horse is a progenitor of the Tori Horse.
Other breeds characteristic of Estonia, and their current numbers, are: Estonian White Haired Sheep (20,800), Estonian Black Haired Sheep (62,500), Estonian Land Race Pig (200,000), Estonian Big White Pig (340,000), Estonian Red Cattle (125,000) Estonian Black and White Cattle (260,000), Estonian Draught Horse (250) and Tori Horse (2,600). The only Estonian thoroughbred-the Estonian Hound - was certified in 1954.
In Estonia 46% of the mainland is covered with forests comprising more than 2 million hectares. The reserve of standing timber is as much as 284 million solid cubic metres (scm). The forests are predominantly (61%) coniferous. The average age of the stands is 52 years, the average amount of timber supplied per hectare is 154 scm, and the average annual growth increment is 4.98 scm per hectare.
The last five decades have seen a significant expansion in the area of forest stand. Today it meets the requirements and needs of both environmental protection and the forest industry. Among European countries Estonia ranks as one of the first in forest area per capita and the reserve of growing forests. Estonian forests are used in diverse ways, e.g., for timber and for environmental and recreational purposes. The latter also includes gathering berries and mushrooms, hunting and sports.
Up to 1995 the forests were mainly held in State ownership. After the Land Reform is put into full effect, 40–50% of these forests will change hands and will become small farm forests. From an environmental point of view it is feasible and preferable to have certain vital forests (nature reserves, recreational areas of national importance located on the outskirts of the towns) remain under the ownership of national and local governments. (See Chapters 6 and 10 of this Strategy.)
In 1995,3.8 million scm of standing timber was felled, only 0.8 % of it from private forests. The average volume comprised less than 40% of the increment and only about 1% of the forest reserve (in Sweden the corresponding figure is 2.7%, and in Finland it is 3%). Most of the experts agree upon the fart that the amount of felling can be increased without threatening forest reserves.
Due to moderate felling and expansion of the forested land, the reserves of Estonian forests continue to grow. In the future the age structure of the forests will also improve and consequently the cutting volume may be increased further. By the year 2010, it might reach 5 million of scm per year, which comprises only about a quarter of a year's increment.
Given the importance of forests from the viewpoints of the environment, the landscape, and biodiversity, about 20% of the forests have been classified as preserved and protected forests. In the remaining forests timber production has priority but even there environmental regulations must be followed.
There are no endangered tree species in Estonia. Only the yew tree (40 sites) and spindle tree (a few sites) are under local protection. Estonian forests have preserved their natural appearance and diversity, but only about three thousand hectares of primeval forests have preserved. To protect genetic resources several genetic reserves and clone archives and repositories have been established. Seed orchards, protected forest areas with natural regeneration, seed stores for coniferous forests (spruce seeds are stored for over 10 years) are only some examples of the measures taken. Arboretums are also worth mentioning. They were started in 1965 and now their territories cover about 250 hectares (180 of pine, 32 of spruce). A total of 503 pine clones and 178 spruce clones can be found in different nurseries. Seeds for coniferous tree species are preserved in two seed stores, Kilingi-Nömme and Rakvere, where deep freezing is used.
Since 1960, the number of game species has increased. This can be explained by the low intensity of forestry and the fact that most hunting activities were reasonably well managed, at least up to the early 1990s. The list of game species includes 17 mammals and 23 birds.
In comparison to other European countries the multiplicity and variety of game is high. The abundance of wild animals has not disturbed or interfered with the everyday life and the economy. In spite of the increase in the number of game species, except for the beasts of prey the numbers of big game have decreased. The main reasons for that are: the hunting policy for big game of the last decades, persistent poaching, and changes in the animals' living conditions. This is a trend that requires close monitoring.
Table 7-1
Numbers of Main Game Species in Recent Decades
| Year | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Specie | 1955 | 1970 | 1985 | 1990 | 1994 |
| moose | 800 | 9600 | 11000 | 16000 | 7500 |
| Alces alces | (2) | (2070) | (5164) | (5400) | |
| red deer | - | - | 450 | 900 | 1300 |
| Cervus elaphus | (57) | (70) | |||
| roe deer | 5000 | 42400 | 39000 | 58500 | 43000 |
| Capreolus europaeus | (9) | (2359) | (8117) | (9600*) | |
| brown bear | 110 | 180 | 500 | 840 | 670 |
| Ursus arctos | (-) | (1) | (24) | (55) | |
| grey wolf | 800 | 9 | 100 | 190 | 520 |
| Canis lupus | (206) | (9) | (88) | (85) | |
| lynx | 240 | 80 | 580 | 940 | 5220 |
| Felis lynx | (-) | (22) | (60) | (85) | |
| otter | 800 | 650 | 400 | 1000 | 2000 |
| Lutra lutra | (-) | (3) | (-) | - | |
| beaver | - | - | 900 | 22600 | |
| Castor fiber | (24) | (200) | 54000 | ||
* the real number is probably at least 1/3 higher.
Note: a dash signifies lack of data.
Estonian agriculture with its long history of 4,000 years is the expression of a traditional and sustainable way of life. Nature-friendly agricultural landscapes dominate over artificial landscapes and they can be considered a cultural heritage that should be treasured and preserved as national wealth.
In the post-war period, small farms were incorporated into sovkhozes and kolkhozes (State and collective farms) and agriculture specialised in meat and milk production (mainly on the basis of imported concentrated fodder and grain) for the other regions of the Soviet Union. During that period most of the policy attention was paid to the rural centres represented by State and collective farms, for which development was pushed and favoured. Many small villages disappeared from the map. Large numbers of small schools were closed down and the rural population was agglomerated mostly around the abovementioned centres.
Agricultural production was intensified and spatially concentrated during this period. More and more mineral fertilisers and pesticides were used, in spite of the inability of the plants to absorb all the minerals, so that the high levels of application per hectare mentioned in section I were attained. Large-scale concentrated animal husbandry farms added to the load of pollution. As mentioned, this resulted in vast territories with polluted groundwater. The problem was extremely acute in North Estonia where quaternary deposits are thin. By 1996, however, the volume of agricultural production had significantly decreased and the impact of agriculture on environment had lessened considerably.
The principal pieces of legislation, regulations and standards that concern the environment and are currently in effect include the following:
Property Law (1993)
Law on Regulation of Hunting (1994)
Waste Law (1992)
Law on Protected Natural Objects (1994)
Fisheries Law (1991)
Environmental Expertise Law (1994)
Regulation on Establishment of Procedures and Compensation Rates for Damage Caused to Natural Flora and Fauna (1995)
Act on Animal protection (1992)
Land Cadastre Act (1994)
Amelioration Act (1994)
Mineral Resource Law (1994)
Land Reform Law (1991)
Forest Act (1993)
Act on Forest Fund (1994)
Regulation on Export, Import and Transit of Hazardous Wastes (1992)
Regulation on Hazardous Waste Permits (1992)
Ownership Reform (1991)
Act on Planning and Construction (1995)
Act on Agricultural Reforms (1992)
Act on the Protection of Coasts and Shores (1995)
Law on Compensation for Pollution Damage (1993)
Regulation on Pollution Permits
Act on Sustainable Development (1995)
Plant Protection Act (1994)
Water Act (1994)
Regulation on Restricted Fertilizer and Sludge Application (1994)
Regulation on Pesticide Marketing Permits (1994)
Estonia has signed and ratified the following conventions: Biological Diversity (1994), Bern (1992), Ramsar, Washington (1993), Helsinki (1995), Basel (1992) and Gdansk Conventions, Montreal protocol (1992) and UNO Skeleton Convention on Climate Change.
Environmental quality requirements. By the beginning of the year 1996 the Estonian Republic had passed regulations on ambient air, drinking water, groundwater and the quality of soil. Soon requirements for noise, vibration, radiation and residue will be established.
Emission requirements for waste water and exhaust. Requirements for exhaust and noise correspond to the ones of the European Union. Step by step the emission requirements for the pollutant content of waste water will be unified with the environmentally and economically grounded EU requirements, taking into consideration also the characteristics of the Baltic Sea region. In the same way restrictions imposed on immobile air and water pollutants will meet the EU standards and will be tied to unit values.
The number of substances monitored has decreased and compared to the Soviet period most of the requirements reflect reality. Many of the local requirements are on the same level or even more stringent than those of the EU For example, some of them meet the Helsinki Commission HELCOM suggestions for waste treatment requirements to guarantee an ecological balance in the Baltic Sea.
Environmental-permits are permits for utilisation, surveying and extraction of natural resources, and they include the category of pollution permits. These permits are issued by the Ministry of Environment or local county administrations. The most essential utilisation permits are: permits for geological research or mining mineral resources, water utilisation permits, ambient air pollution permits, and permits for dumping sludge. The last three set normative guidelines for volume and content of pollutants in effluents and waste. The permits are valid for 5 years, and those concerning mineral resources, for 25 years.
The Ministry of Environment, county governor or local municipal officials give fishing permits. Hunting permits are issued by the owner of the hunting region. Permits for felling in State forests are given out by the Forest District, and for felling in municipal forests, by the County Councils. Construction permits are issued by the County and City Councils.
Tightening supervision and improving the monitoring of the use of environmental permits is one of the priorities of the environmental management system.
Eutrophication of surface water bodies that brings about a decline in the quality of water, damage to aquatic life and a decrease in the numbers of species.
Continuous pollution due to insufficient purification of waste water (especially in the coastal area of East Virumaa county, Pämu Bay).
Insufficient water protection means in the Pandivere Water Protection Reserve, where most of the groundwater in Estonia is formed.
Pollution of surface and groundwater with nitrates, phenols and oil products in some places (e.g. Ida-Viru County, Lääne-Viru County, etc.).
Degradation of hazardous chemicals left behind in derelict storage depots for herbicides and other toxic chemicals.
Storing of waste, including daily and dangerous wastes, in sites not designated for that purpose.
Contaminated soil, which is a direct danger to subsurface and surface waters and also to the health of human beings. The exploitation of contaminated soil in agriculture and horticulture adds to the risk of adding poisonous and dangerous substances to food supplies.
Here the main concern is the continuing degradation of soils that arises from the following main causes:
Mechanical degradation: the use of heavy agricultural machinery has caused compaction of soil in the past and this process, which is under way even now, decreases crop yields over time. The soils in Southern Estonia are especially sensitive to use of heavy equipment.
Biological degradation: this is caused by the contamination of soil, mostly due to poor manure and sludge management and poor facilities for their storage. Such contamination, in turn, decreases the number of soil microbes and organisms. Mistakes in crop rotation: e.g. monoculture and allowing a shortage of organic matter to develop, are also key issues here.
Chemical degradation: this is the result of excessive use of various chemicals. Chemical degradation was a live issue in the period of collective farms, when chemicals were cheap and easy to get. This is also a problem in the vicinity of old storage depots for fertiliser, chemicals and fuel.
Construction degradation: this is one of the most important problems for soil protection both in Estonia and the whole world. In Estonia, 130,000 hectares of fertile land are lay the network of roads, buildings and other structures.
Domestic degradation: this is the waste from settlements, enterprises and construction activities, most of which is deposited in landfills. Domestic degradation is closely connected to construction degradation.
The wrong timing of cultivation is also a threat to soils, for it leads to greater erosion and exacerbates the problem of compactation.
Our scientists foresee an extensive swamping of soils (due to deteriorated drainage structures) and the spread of weeds because of abandoned fields. A related problem is that the rapidly growing amount of weed seeds in the ground brings about the necessity for more extensive application of chemical herbicides in the future.
Changes in the structure of the landscape reflect the social and economical processes under way in a society. The current re-privatisation of land and the rapid growth of the private sector in the economy will have their impact on the pattern of land use and landscape diversity in the coming years. The source of the principal threats to the natural environment may shift from collectivised agriculture and industrial pollutants to the expansion of urbanised areas and the reintroduction of economic activity to many coastal areas that were off-limits for civilian purposes during Soviet rule. The amount of abandoned and untilled lands and the land overgrown with shrubs is also expected to increase as a consequence of the reduction in agriculture's profitability.
From a viewpoint of biodiversity, the principal problems include:
Extinction of semi-natural habitat (wooded, flooded and waterside meadows) due to the fact that traditional lines of production, such as pasturage on meadows, are dying out.
The growth in the density of population along roadsides and on the shores and riverbanks is a threat to natural plant and forest communities
A rapid economic upswing may impair fragile ecosystems if effective pollution controls are not maintained on agriculture and industry.
Conversely, abandoned and untilled lands suffer from excessive dampness.
Although it may not be an immediate problem, an eventual increase in timber felling rates and hunting activity may create problems for biodiversity in forested areas, including for big game species.
As there is no national gene bank in Estonia, in the years 1950 to 1980 the Jõgeva Plant Breeding Station handed all plant varieties for preservation over to the Soviet Union's Institute of Plant Husbandry. But the latter became really hard pressed in the new economic situation in Russia and thus our accessions were on the verge of extinction. Some of them lost their germinative capacity. In 1994 we applied for the varieties which survived and they were returned to us. On the basis of this experience we can draw the conclusion that varieties should be replicated and Estonia should be the first to preserve all its varieties (including the old ones).
The Polli Institute of Horticulture has also suffered heavy losses and has not been able to guarantee the regeneration of several strawberry varieties of Estonian origin. The Nigula Nature Reserve has had difficulties in preserving the collected cranberry varieties and the ones developed in that reserve. At present we are looking for preservation opportunities in the United States. The Polli Institute of Horticulture cannot guarantee the preservation of all its fruit and berry accessions.
In general, Estonian flora have a rich, varied and economically efficient genetic supply. Both the natural predecessors of species exploited now and the ones with agricultural potential could be used more effectively. These species and varieties are resistant to cold and have been adapted to different soil conditions. In recent decades some of them have been used in plant breeding.
Up to now national policy has not committed itself to preserving livestock species of Estonian origin, and that should be a priority. A number of local breeds have not been valued or certified (dogs, hens, goats). There is still no systematic inventory and the collected data have not been properly assembled.
From the point of view of sustainable use of natural resources and maintaining existing timber reserves, forest utilisation is unreasonably low at places but too intensive in others. Policies need to be worked out to ensure rates of forest exploitation that are more uniform spatially.
In forestry itself, sustainable techniques of felling and forest management are used ' very little. As explained in Chapter 10, in part this problem is attributable to the shortness of the periods of validity of cutting permits, which encourages an attitude of “mining the resource,” and in part it is due to institutional weaknesses in the governmental unit charged with forest management.
Due to the inconclusive state of Property and Land Reform (Chapter 3), effective administration on about 600,000 hectares of land has been hindered. In those areas, final fellings of timber have been stopped and thinning restricted. Therefore 0.7 million scm of standing timber is unfelled.
Forest monitoring and supervision in private forests is unsatisfactory. The Forest Department has not had to assume this reponsibility in the past and has not develop its capacity in this area sufficiently.
The importance of forests and their impact on nature and biodiversity still awaits a proper appraisal.
The age structure of forest stands need balancing (the number of trees ready for felling is twice too small, as a proportion of the entire forest).
Biodiversity protection measures are not well formulated in national forestry policy, and so felling proceeds without heed to this concern.
There is a serious threat to the biological diversity of marine life and a possibility of decreases in fish stocks because of eutrophication. Nutrients are in general not filtered out before being passed into water supplies, there are nitrogen leaches from the fields, and manure management is still not properly controlled.
Human-induced changes in the marine environment have impaired spawning conditions and spawning areas have narrowed as well.
Substances which are hazardous for both mankind and sea life accumulate in the sediments and in marine organisms themselves.
The conditions of storage facilities in ports for residues, wastes and bilge stores are poor.
The growth of marine transit traffic and cargo has brought about an increase of ocean contamination from oil emulsion and ship wastes.
The following trends should be mentioned:
Decrease in the stock of some species (elk, boar).
Increase in the number of beasts of prey, as a result of recent climate conditions (cold winters) and the economic hardships of recent years. The population of wolves has grown the most.
The spreading acclimatisation and adaptation to the surroundings of some introduced populations (beaver, red deer).
The stabilisation of some of the endangered species (otter) thanks to strict hunting restrictions.
Although many of the nation's basic environmental policies have been formulated, a major constraint in carrying them out fully is the lack of sufficient funding at the national level for activities which will improve the environment for all Estonians. Although the private sector must share much of the burden of environmental important, the State has an important role to play in this regard. Examples of activities that require greater funding are advisory services for ecological (biodynamic) agriculture, temporary subsidies for cultivating in an ecological appropriate manner, assistance in developing an registering ecological trademarks that will enhance agricultural export prospects, more research on the relation between soil contamination and groundwater pollution, greater support to gene banks, strengthening of the Forestry Department so that it is more capable of monitoring forest exploitation, and a programme of operational studies designed to lead to development of plans for reducing contamination and soil degradation, from sources such as manure deposits, aging fuel depots, and use of heavy agricultural machinery.
A related concern is that the Government requires a corps of environmental expertise, or the means to pay for it via consultancy contracts, in order to pursue the occasional but necessary legal proceedings against polluters and other violators of environmental norms. Management of the environment is inherently a technical field, and appropriate court decisions cannot be made without research and testimony from trained experts.
The financial constraint is an important one and it must be solved primarily at the level of the national Government.
Environmental policy in agriculture aims to follow international guidelines and initiatives: the World Nature Protection Strategy, Agenda 21 (adopted in 1992 in Rio de Janeiro at the UNO Environment and Development Conference), the Action Plan for Central and Eastern Europe (adopted in 1993 at the Conference of the Ministers of the Environment in Luzem), the 1995 conference resolutions, the guidelines of international conventions and agreements ratified by the Estonian government, and the guidelines of the Estonian Environmental Strategy.
Our environmental policy is bound to both internationally approved standpoints and our Estonian historical traditions, in the context of the present social and economic situation. Its main principles are:
Influencing the development of agriculture towards sustainability to satisfy the needs of the present generation without damaging the interests of future generations.
Preventing and avoiding environmental damage, focusing on the causes since correcting the damage is often more expensive and sometimes is even impossible.
Encouraging caution in decision making concerning the environment; if the impact on the environment is not clear, decisions should be avoided until the impact is better understood.
The environment should be handled as part of Estonia's common wealth or national heritage. It also has influenced strongly our cultural legacy. Environmental interests should rise above those of politics, present economic problems, and propaganda. To guarantee a sustainable use of natural resources and preservation of a healthy environment, all social strata and groups should reach a consensus.
Environmental concerns in rural areas can be classified into two categories: those that create contamination of the environment (via pollution and emissions of various kinds), and those that cause degradation of natural resources (compactation of soils, soil erosion, loss of biodiversity, reduction of fish stocks through overexploitation, etc.). In this context, the broad objectives of environmental policy for agriculture are to:
Reduce the present rates of contamination of the environment and degradation of natural resources.
Adopt a style of economic growth that permits substantial improvements in income levels without aggravating the problems of environmental contamination and resource degradation.
In regard to biodiversity, guarantee the existence of animal and plant populations characteristic of Estonia, and also the existence of natural and semi-natural associations and habitats and landscapes.
In regard to marine resources, use the fish stocks and coastal regions sustainably, maintain the ecological balance of the marine and freshwater coasts and guarantee the natural reproduction, at acceptable rates, of fish stocks and aquatic life.
In order to achieve these objectives, it will be necessary to increase environmental awareness in all segments of the population, and continue to introduce feasible technologies of environmental management, so that eventually living in closer harmony with the environment becomes a natural part of the daily decision process in all households, firms and other organisations in society.
The more specific sub-goals for the environmental aspects of agriculture, which will promote attainment of the broad objectives, may be considered to be the following:
Achieve sustainable use of raw materials and energy.
Decrease the amount of polluting wastes and residue via:
- Wider application of the “orderly household” principle, both in agricultural production and in daily life.
- Achieving a step by step transition to the utilisation of sustainable technologies.
- Creation the necessary social and economic motivation to make possible these transformations.
- Carry out exploitation of local fuels (peat, wood chips)on a larger scale.
For achieving sustainable rates of exploitation of natural resources and respecting the fundamentals of environmental protection, international experience has demonstrated that the following general principles can be used to guide solutions in many cases:
Adoption of the “polluter or consumer pays” principle. All persons and entities that use or damage the environment bear complete responsibility for their actions. This refers not only to paying the cost of environmental clean-up but also the principle that the price of a product must reflect all costs incurred during its life-cycle (manufacturing, distribution, utilisation, final disposal), including the cost of natural resources used and relevant measures to protect the environment.
Cooperation with other countries is important for solving global and regional environmental problems and for the prevention of negative transboundary environmental impacts.
Environmental protection measures should be applied at the environmental and administrative levels at which they produce the best results. Acting on the principle of shared responsibility, national and local public authorities, enterprises and the general population should, within their respective areas of jurisdiction, cooperate in solving environmental problems.
As much as possible, traditional ways of nature conservation should be promoted and the population's awareness of the benefits of these approaches should be enhanced.
In promoting environmental awareness, emphasis should placed on the role of education, through both formal and informal means, including mass information campaigns and more direct approaches at the level of groups and individuals.
Sustainable use of natural resources and effective environmental protection is first and foremost determined by the technological level of production. Thus effective actions to minimise the impact of production on the environmental would derive from the following basic principles:
Application of the best available technology that guarantees the most economic use of natural resources and the smallest amount of waste for the lowest reasonable cost.
Provision of economic incentives for the adoption of such technology, including the use of measures such as pollution quotas (gradually reduced over time), substantial fines for the violation of environmental norms, and the development of pollution rights markets.
Regarding this last point, experience has shown that pollution is more effectively controlled by establishing limits and allowing firms to choose how to meet those limits, rather than imposing specified technological requirements. A further step in this direction which is being applied in other countries in certain watersheds and airsheds to is define acceptable amounts of pollution, issue licenses for up to that amount in total, and allow firms to buy and sell the licenses (or “rights”) among each other. In that way, those firms that can most efficiently reduce pollution will do so, whereas those that would incur great costs in doing so may postpone their reductions. This ensures that the overall cost to society of meeting pollution targets is minimised, and it encourages technological innovation in regard to the ways of meeting the targets. Clearly, the defined “acceptable” amounts of pollution can be reduced gradually over time.
Fines are most effective when they are applied to violations of agreed plans to reduce or eliminate sources of pollution. In other words, if a livestock farm has been following accepted practices for decades in polluting the groundwater, it is not very constructive to suddenly declare that it will be fined for continuing to do so. In practice, this would usually mean closing down the farm. A better approach is to negotiate a plan with the farm, under which it would lessen its pollution in stages. Failure to adhere to the plan would then make the farm subject to substantial fines, designed basically to act as deterrents.
In cases of environmental degradation, sometimes it is necessary for policy to directly intervene in the choice of technology, by providing disincentives (or outright prohibitions) of especially degrading technologies and incentives for approaches that are more friendly to the environment. An example could be requirements to plant lines of trees as windbreaks in the windy western regions, or subsidies for doing so, since the benefits would accrue generally to those regions and not just to the farms involved. Another example could be the reduction of fishing rights for marine species whose stocks are being depleted.
Among the range of concrete measures for controlling environmental contamination, preference should be given to the ones applied at the source of pollution. In other words, remedial plans, pollution quotas and pollution markets should be applied at the sources of pollution as much as possible, rather than “downstream,” where it is more difficult to identify responsibilities. In this case, the sources of pollution can also include households.
Such measures can try to influence diverse variables that affect the environment, including the following:
Technologies of production and consumption.
The intensity of use of primary commodities, water and energy in production. The less this intensity, the lower will be the volumes of waste.
The intensity of use of renewal stocks of resources, particularly fisheries stocks and some wild game.
Technologies for controlling the emission of pollutants (mainly sewage treatment plants, recycling systems, etc.).
Technologies that degrade natural resources, such as heavy agricultural equipment that compacts soils and the creation of large plowed expanses in windy areas.
Good results can be achieved even at low cost by adopting policies that encourage farms and firms to follow the principles of an “orderly household” in production. Adherence to these principles can be further promoted by campaigns of increasing environmental awareness among the population.
Estonia has signed 40 agreements with its neighbours and several other European countries. Besides framework conventions several agreements have been signed in the spheres of fisheries, water and ambient air protection, marine pollution and waste disposal and management. Estonia has subscribed to the Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes and agreements for sustainable exploitation and for conducting environmental impact assessments.
Estonia also takes part in the work of the UNO and its Economic Commission and participates in the work of the conventions established under the aegis of the European Union.
The aim of the cooperation between the EU and Estonia is to modernise the Estonian economy and agricultural sector, in both the State and private sectors, and guarantee environmental protection first and foremost via the application of clean technologies. The EU accepts that Estonia has the right to set stricter norms and tighter standards to attain the desired goals.
Among the other means for improving the conditions of ground and surface waters it should not be forgotten that more studies and research in this field are required, in order to enhance our understanding of causes and effects, and of how alternative policy measures may influence the extent of pollution. For this, more funding will be required.
To decrease the impact of agriculture in terms of environmental pollution, we have to achieve the following operational aims:
Eliminate the problems in manure management as sources of groundwater pollution.
Act on the recommendations of HELCOM and EU as to the application of mineral fertilisers, manure and hazardous chemicals.
Avoid the concentration of production in unfavourable places from the water protection point of view.
Provide necessary protection in the Pandivere Upland groundwater formation region, - given its importance to the nation.
Provide an inventory of the state of the water treatment and purifying stations of enterprises and villages, find out their ownership, appraise their technical conditions and the necessities and opportunities for their rehabilitation.
Cut down on untreated waste water discharges into bodies of water and groundwater.
Provide common systems for supplying potable drinking water in villages (especially for the ones in contaminated water catchments).
The following steps should be taken to reduce environmental damage that results from plant protection measures in agriculture:
Implement an integrated plant protection system where the emphasis is placed on advanced organisational and agronomic techniques (e.g. correct cultivation, crop rotation, balanced fertilisation, making use of disease resistant varieties, etc.). The application of chemical plant protection measures should be seen as a last resort.
Use only environmentally friendly and harmless plant protection measures and pesticides that would satisfy the requirements of plant sanitation and food hygiene regulations.
Guarantee farmers timely information about the appearance, development and spread of pests so that effective preventive measures could be taken at the most appropriate time, thus cutting down on the total volume of pesticide consumption.
Provide training and employment tests for plant protection personnel.
Register and classify modern and effective pesticides on the basis of expert evaluations and classification systems used in other countries.
Expand the use of natural chemicals through agricultural advisory efforts and credit programmes that promote biodynamic (ecological friendly) agriculture. (Chapter 6 develops this point more.)
Although ecologically friendly agriculture is on the rise, at present it is impossible to give up on chemicals altogether, because pests may decrease productivity up to 25 – 40%, and affect the quality and marketability of crops. In some extreme years they might ruin the whole crop.
The goal here is to do away with residual wastes and discarded objects left by activities which have come to an end or have moved elsewhere, and to return the spoiled landscapes to cultivation. To achieve these aims we should:
Through legislation, assign responsibility to the State in cases in which it has polluted and otherwise damaged the environment, including responsibility for residual pollution when the enterprise is privatised.
Clean up residual pollution brought about by agricultural production (abandoned fuel depots, abandoned machinery, etc.).
Prevent leaching from storage depots and landfills.
Solve the problems connected with the waste management of small farms and agricultural enterprises (by establishing and maintaining dump sites, composting wastes, and transporting and treating hazardous wastes).
Carry out an evaluation and inventory of abandoned facilities (farms, storehouses, rural manufacturing workshops, etc.) as possible sources for point pollution, find ways for their rehabilitation and use, or their clean up.
Local governments should take on the responsibility for evaluating sources of residual waste in their territories, as it is the main threat to the quality of groundwater. However, they undoubtedly will need technical advice and perhaps financial assistance as well in order to assume this responsibility.
We should aim to stabilise the amount of domestic waste at 250 – 300 kg per person per year and increase recycling by 30 – 40%. In addition, it is necessary to guarantee the treatment, storage and burial of the waste according to internationally approved environmental and hygienic requirements, and to optimise the number of domestic dump sites.
It will be required also to construct new dump sites that meet the standards of the EU and close down the old ones.
A system for hazardous waste treatment in agriculture should be created and farmers educated in its purposes and use. Correspondingly, hazardous waste treatment services should be provided throughout the country.
One of the major challenges in this area is to increase the adoption of ecological agricultural practices. As well as providing benefit to the environment in the form of reduced levels of contamination of soils and water, and lower rates of soil degradation, adoption of such practices will open up higher-value export markets for Estonian farmers. On a world level, this field is one of the fastest growing in agriculture. What is needed is greater advisory support for farmers in this area, and in addition financing is required. Small portions of the credit allocated through the Agricultural and Rural Life Credit Fund can achieve greater advances in this field, which is still in its infancy in Estonia. Also, the national Government could consider temporary subsidies for farmers undertaking such practices, until they are able to realise some of the economic benefits of the new techniques. In the short run, they are likely to experience reductions in yields and incomes, and therefore they need support in order to be convinced that in the longer run ecological agriculture is worthwhile.
Other constructive steps in regard to land use would be to:
Appraise the neglected and abandoned arable lands from the environmental point of view, and determine their most suitable uses or methods of management.
Support the utilisation of agricultural machinery which is less injurious to soil structures instead of encouraging the plowing of virgin lands. For this purpose, it could be made obligatory to carry out a survey by environmental experts before making any changes in agricultural landscapes,.
a) Biodiversity and landscapes
An operational goal in regard to biodiversity is to commit the sectors managing natural resources to the aims of biodiversity protection and sustainable agriculture. For this to be achieved, it likely to be essential to undertake intersectoral programmes and projects so that biodiversity considerations can influence decisions on investment by the sectors interested in using the resource base primarily for production. This implies a degree of interinstitutional coordination that has not yet been achieved, so the Government will have to devote particular attention to this requirement.
Also, it will be necessary to establish and maintain new protection zones, compensative areas and core nature areas to enhance biodiversity. Not only nature reserves, but also buffer zones are required. They act as filters and obstacles that inhibit the spread of pollutants. They are especially useful along riverbanks, in the form of forested strips ten metres or more in width on each side of a river, to help reduce the leaching of pollutants from soils into the rivers.
For landscape protection programmes to be effective, local governments and associations need to become full partners in their design and implementation. This is another area where the national Government should intensify its efforts, in the sense of devoting more resources to working actively with local governments and citizens' associations, for they are the institutions which have the greatest interest in the preservation of their landscapes and wildlife habitats.
b) Plant husbandry
Up to now there are no general guidelines or laws to regulate the management and storage of gene banks. Estonia has cooperated with the gene banks and experimental stations in Latvia and Lithuania. A lot of Estonian varieties are preserved in Latvian fruit research stations. In the framework of mutual assistance pacts all the Baltic States are in the sphere of interest of the Nordic Gene Bank, although it is not yet clear if our fruit and berry varieties and cultivars could be stored there. However, it is obvious that our varieties and cultivars should be replicated elsewhere, and they should be stored in different places.
At the same time Estonian gene banks, based on internationally recognised methodologies, should be formed. Formally this work was started last year, but unfortunately, it has been a very slow process. The finished parts of the database should be replicated and kept in different places. Gene banks and the information about their varieties and cultivars should be made easily accessible for the specialists in Estonia and any other country. Uncertainty as to where to store in gene banks is currently an acute problem for EVIKA, the Polli Experimental Station, the Institute of Experimental Biology and the Nigula Nature Reserve.
An essential step would be the preparation and creation of a legislative framework concerning the protection of agricultural accession collections. Among other things the law should guarantee that in the future one official could not decide upon liquidation or reorganisation of the collection. Funds should be allotted for the maintenance of the collections. It should be remembered that in the long run maintenance of a base of genetic diversity is essential to guarantee the survival of agriculture.
c) Animal husbandry
The genetic base for livestock has become narrower, and therefore more fragile, over the past few decades. In order to reverse this trend, it is necessary to do the following things:
Assign priority to the varieties bred in Estonia, for research purposes.
Arrange a systematic inventory of varieties characteristic of Estonia (including such economically less important species as goats, poultry, etc.).
Increase the number of Estonian Native Cattle to 2,000, to avoid the danger of their eventual extinction. To avoid inbreeding it is advisable to use Finnish bulls.
A state institution should take up Estonian Native Horse breeding, since in the foreseeable future it will not be a profitable activity. A detailed plan should be drawn up. Selection should be based on their adaptation to local conditions and suitability for various uses, including as a tourist attraction. The Herdbook for the Estonian Native Horse should be kept pure.
d) Fish stocks and protection of coastal areas
To protect surface and coastal shelf waters we have to:
Work out a scheme for the rational, sustainable exploitation of water bodies. This will require extensive coordination and consultations with fishermen's associations and coastal communities, and it should be developed in the context of broader, integrated development plans for those communities.
Once such a scheme is in place, coordinate the issuance of fishing licenses and regulations on fishing technology so that those instruments promote the fulfillment of the scheme.
Guarantee the biological and if necessary also chemical treatment of waste waters.
Work toward the development of regional international treaties for improving and preserving coastal water quality. Priority for such treaties would have to be given to the Gulf of Finland.
e) Landscapes and forestry
Steps to be taken are as follows:
Create a modern conception for the in situ and ex-situ protection of the genetic bank of the Estonian forests.
Improve and elaborate on different aspects of plant and animal species protection, landscape and habitat protection in the framework of updated legislation bearing in mind international agreements and the requirements of the EU.
Improve the existing network of nature reserves following the lines of the EU recommendations, based on strategies for landscapes and biological diversity, which are embodied in the programmes Natura 2000 and Pan-Europe.
Preserve all natural and semi-natural forest types and tree populations by setting up a network of well-protected forest reserves.
f) Genetic diversity
Estonia should be the first to be solicitous about the survival of local breeds and varieties. This calls for well-considered plans of action, programmes and legislation. All varieties and cultivars should be replicated. It is advisable to create exchange deposits in the neighbouring countries. The creation of a regional gene bank, e.g. Baltoscandia, would fit the purpose.
To bring together people interested in alternative methods of agricultural production the Estonian Biodynamic Association was formed in 1989. At present its membership is more than 160 people.
Out of 120 ecological farms (1 July 1996), 56 farms have achieved certification with the label “eco” that Swedish and Finnish specialists have used in certification and advising of ecofarms. At this time, Estonia enjoys very good conditions for advancing ecological agriculture. In recent years the loss of farmers' purchasing power has brought about a decrease in agrochemical application. This trend has enhanced the natural renewal processes of the soil. Other natural and favourable preconditions are the diversity of landscapes and mosaic structure of arable lands. It is noteworthy that the traditional Estonian way of rural life and agricultural production has always approximated the modem conception of sustainable development.
On the whole our State does not support ecological agriculture as State budgetary appropriations on it amounted to only 500,000 EEK, despite the requirement for amounts several times greater. To encourage ecological agriculture, a Government programme for its development, which includes the following factors, should be initiated (Michelson ja Peterson, 1996):
Creation of demonstration farms where ecological methods could be applied.
The building of a network of extension and information services and increasing allotments on research.
Creating a basis for farmers to borrow for covering production expenses under ecological agriculture, if necessary by modifying some of the operating policies of the Agriculture and Rural Life Credit Fund.
Working out a monitoring and control system according to the requirements of the EU.
Improving the marketing conditions for ecological products.
Developing a wider system for certifying and labeling environmentally sound products.
Supporting ecological agriculture on a wider range in case agriculture is going to be subsidised directly (Chapter 2).
In order to facilitate the adoption of appropriate technologies of production, it will be necessary to:
Develop a system of standards, criteria and requirements to assess the environmental impact of technological processes and production. This requires a considerable amount of technical work and must be updated continuously, making as much use as possible of information from other countries.
Develop guidelines for environmental management in agriculture, and support the agricultural advisory services in carrying out a program of informing farmers of these guidelines.
By the end of the year 1995 about 70% of the needed legislation acts concerning the utilisation of mineral resources, environmental protection and territory planning had been adopted, were in proceedings or in preparation.
In the future more attention should be paid to the regulation and systematisation of legislation as well as taking measures for integrating the legislative framework with the norms of the EU. The following new legislation, and regulations for existing laws, are needed:
Landscape Protection Law
Soil Protection Law
Regulation on Ecological Agriculture
Regulation on Use of Fertilisers
Regulation on Agricultural Production
Supplement for the Act on Sustainable Development
Other legislative priorities include:
Draft laws establishing the requirements of the “White Book” should be compiled and standardised.
Emission requirements should step-by-step be adjusted to those of the EU.
Environmental standards should be made to conform to those of ISO and CEN.
Surveys about the relevant legislation, regulations and recommended practices concerning environmental protection should be prepared for the Farmers Unions, cooperatives, and agricultural advisors.
With the restructuring and development of the Estonian economy, the role of local governments is on the rise. This means that in the process of elaboration and systematisation of legislation considerably more attention should be attached to drawing up regulations concerning the obligations, rights and responsibilities of local governments. It is necessary to create administrative units dealing with environmental protection in City and County Councils.
To solve problems in the places of their origin, environmental management systems need to be developed in large agricultural enterprises.
The requirements for educating the public and creating a higher environmental awareness mean a more important role for non-governmental and social organisations, associations, and media in promoting environment protection. The Government should support these institutions in part by providing them with scientific information and educational materials.
Land use planning and assessments of environmental impacts are of the basic tools for anticipating potential environmental problems in the future and minimising or avoiding them. Land use planning is carried out on four levels — on the national, county, town and parish levels. It goal is to balance the interests of landscapes and habitats, the economy, and society, and to integrate them with those of households and individuals as they go about their daily tasks. Out of this planning process, zoning and land use regulations, for biodiversity protection and reduction of problems of environmental contamination and degradation, are then developed. Land use planning should be based on concepts of local landscape ecology.
Balancing environmental and ecological interests is one of the key issues in the formulation of the national programme “Estonia 2010,” and also in county planning. A preliminary round of county planning should be finished in the whole country by 1998. Community planning, another basic element for balanced development, is underway and should be completed in all localities by 2005. Planning at both these levels will involve agricultural issues related to the environment.
One of the most effective means in anticipating the damage to the environment is considering the impact of environmental factors in an early stage of decision making for economic projects. Environmental Impact Assessment, a tool widely accepted throughout the world, is a mandatory evaluation of the degree of compliance of a proposed activity with environmental regulations and the principles of sustainable development, with the aim of seeking the best practical solution. It is also obligatory when issuing permits for utilisation of natural resources, pollution and construction.
After the promulgation of Environmental Impact Assessment and Environmental Auditing Law, which is based on the guidelines of the EU and on the Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context, the following effects should result:
Enterpreneurs will be responsible for the assessment of the environmental impacts of their own activities.
Citizens will become involved in environmental assessments via local governments.
Increased environmental awareness of decision makers and more informed public opinion will help ensure the full implementation of the recommendations of environmental impact assessments.
Environmental auditing should become an inseparable part of environmental management. It should be obligatory in private firms, in activities which deal with hazardous objects, in activities supported by Governmental funding, and in cases in which environmental requirements have been persistently ignored.
The aim of applying economic levers is to influence both producers and consumers to use natural resources efficiently, avoid waste and residue, and to guarantee markets for environmentally sound products which are equal to or better than those enjoyed by products and processes which are more wasteful of natural resources. The principles of their application is as follows:
Necessary expenditures on protecting the environment from the effects of production and cleaning up damage to the environment brought about by production, as well as the cost of natural resources used, should be reflected in production costs.
The sums collected as compensation for environmental damages and fees for utilisation of natural resources should be used for solving environmental problems.
“Environmental externalities,” which are environmental benefits and damages accruing to the general population and not just to the individual or firm that creates them, should be taken into account in economic policy. This means developing systems of fees for activities which injure the environment and subsidies for those which benefit it. Such levers can be used, for example, to better control manure management, to encourage proper land cultivation principles, and to promote the adoption of technologies which generate little waste.
For major and well identified pollutants, instead of using fees, the principles discussed in section V above can be applied in some cases, in the sense of establishing maximum tolerance limits (quotas) for pollutants, and then allowing firms to decide how to best meet the quotas, with substantial fines for lack of compliance. A possible further evolution of the system is to allow firms to buy and sell shares in the quotas. Thus, firms which are unable to control their emissions sufficiently would have to pay for obtaining pollution quotas, or pollution rights, while those that can adopt appropriate technologies can benefit by selling their rights.
Excise taxes can be applied to products which are harmful for the environment (detergents, fertilisers, non-reusable packages, etc.). Taxes on waste produced, and on energy consumed, can encourage less wasteful techniques of production.
Local taxes also can be used in the sense of environmental fees, to orient land use in the most appropriate directions from the viewpoint of the environment.
The private sector should develop environmental insurance, as risk cover for contamination in certain cases.
Not to burden the population with taxation, the only such taxes of this nature that should be introduced are those that have a positive impact on the environment. At the same time, other taxes may be reduced so that the overall taxation level does not rise.
Our aim in the near term is to work out an integrated permit system necessary for joining the EU. This system would make sure that the permit holder considers the various impacts of his/her actions on the environment.
Understanding the environment, and how it interacts with human activity, and transmitting that understanding to decision makers and the general public are preconditions for success in environmental protection. Public support is necessarily based on awareness and understanding.
When gathering and transmitting information, it is important to focus on the following topics:
The determination of which kinds of measures are most effective for solving environmental problems, and the most appropriate priorities in applying them.
The provision of information which is of the highest quality and reliability regarding the maintenance of a safe environment.
The involvement a wide range of persons in the process of solving environmental problems, and therefore increasing environmental awareness on a broad scale.
Making widely available information concerning environmental decision-making, surveillance over the compliance with regulations, and environmental impact assessment.
Informing non-governmental organisations and international environmental organisations on a regular basis.
A case in which provision of information will be especially essential concerns the use of agro-chemicals. In the years to come a rise in the application of pesticides is expected (mainly herbicides). But they may not have the desired effects owing to insufficient knowledge and defective equipment for making the applications. Achieving economically and environmentally sound use of pesticides will require an intensive effort at training farmers.
Information campaigns also should be developed to support the creation and use of ecologically benign chemicals, herbal pesticides and other elements of ecological agriculture. Application of such technologies helps our agricultural production gain access to European markets, promotes the health of local producers and consumers, and adds to maintaining ecological balance (enhances biodiversity) in our landscapes. Information on ecological agriculture also should be incorporated into the curricula of schools.
The budgets for environmental education and training of the Estonian Agricultural University and the Ministry of Agriculture should be increased. They should seek ways to improve and diversify their teaching and training methods in this field.
Outstanding specialists in landscape planning and landscape architecture should be produced through our educational system.
A system of advisory services and extension courses should be developed to raise the standard of environmental education of the rural population.
Environmental officials and county and town officials should be better prepared in the field of environment, including for the carrying out of environmental impact assessments, and training courses should be funded by the national Government for that purpose, since the results are to the benefit of the entire nation.
Information on sustainable technologies of production should be made as widely available as possible.
Environmental considerations should be included in material about consumer protection, so as to draw people's attention to sustainable and economic ways of life
International and local documents concerning environment should be explained publicly and made available for everyone.
A list of priorities for applied environmental research should be drawn up and funds provided from the national budget.
The possibility of participating in solving environmental problems on both the local and national levels is a precondition for securing public interest in environmental policy. To interest the public more it is helpful to:
Make public all environmental assessment results, ideas for land use planning, and applications for and issuance of permits for the utilisation and extraction of natural resources and waste permits. These measures not only inform the public but they also build the people's confidence in environmental policy.
Remember that the inhabitants have the right and possibility to make decisions on issues that affect their lives.
Support the formation of non-profit and non-governmental organisations that deal with the environment.
Make more active use of competitions and contests, awards, rewards and other stimuli in the field of environment.
Provide financial support, at least in the medium term, for journals and other publications and electronic media that deal with topics concerning sustainable ways of life.
To obtain necessary and verified information for decision-making, environmental information systems should be established in all counties and parishes, and local officials trained in managing the systems.
Eesti Keskkonnastrateegia. 1996. Tallinn.
Eesti Maakatastri Aastaraamat. Tallinn
Kaasik, T. 1994. Environmental policy instruments in Estonian agriculture. In: Comparing Nordic and Baltic Countries - environmental problems and policies in agriculture and forestry. TemaNord 1994:572, pp. 123–139.
Kasepalu, A. 1991. Mis peremees jätab, selle mets võtab.
Keskkond 1991
Keskkond 1992
Keskkond 1993
Keskkond 1994
Keskkond 1995
Keskkonnasäästlike tehnoloogiate ülekanne Eesti põllumajanduses. 1994. SEI, Tallinn, 106 lk
Keskkonnaalased õigusaktid ja kommentaarid. 1995 Jyväskylä, 204 lk.
Külvik, M., Tambets, J. (Editors) 1996. Key points of the Biodiversity action plan for Estonia. In press.
Maastik, A. 1984. Veekaitse põllumajanduses. Tallinn.
Mander, Ü. and Palang, H. 1994: Changes of landscape structure in Estonia during the Soviet period. GeoJournal, 33, 1, pp. 45–54.
Mander, Ü., Kuusemets, V., ja Treier, K. 1993. Groundwater quality dynamics of South Estonian agricultural landscapes. IAHS Proceedings of the GQM 93: Groundwater Quality Management, Tallinn, Estonia, 6–9 Sept.
Mander, Ü., Palang, H., Tammiksaar, E. 1996. Maakasutuse struktuuri muutused Eestis 20. sajandil. Eesti Geograafia Seltsi aastaraamat, 29 kd. lk. 99–111, Tallinn.
Mauring, T ja Särgava J. 1995. Ecological farming in Estonia. SEI, Tallinn, 17 lk.
Michelson, A ja Peterson, K. 1996. Eesti põllumajanduse keskkonnapoliitika. SEI, Tallinn, 80 lk.
Mikk, M ja Mauring, T. (toim.) 1994. Miks peaks põllumajandus olema ökoloogiline. Tartu, 140lk.
Pedersen, K.H. (ed.) 1995. The Institutional and legal framework for environmental policy in the agricultural sector: Estonia. Latvia and Lithuania. 116 p.
Robinson, N.A. 1993. Agenda 21: Earth's Action Plan. 683 lk.
Sepp, K. Palang, H. (1995) Landscape change and landscape monitoring in Estonia. International Conference “Land use changes and nature conservation in central and Eastern Europe”, Palanga, Lithuania, 5–8 June 5–8. Abstracts, 2 p.
Sepp, K. (1995) Biodiversity and Sustainable development: Estonian case study. Workshop on Sustainable Development. Budapest, Hungary. 17–23 August, 1995. An Article, 7p.
Sepp, K., Hansen, V., Mander, Ü, M.Külvik. (1995) Environmental legislation and questions of property rights in Estonia. Riga, 1995, 22 p.
Sepp. K, Kaasik T., Kallaste T. (1994) Environmental Profile for Estonia. In: Beauty and the East. An Evaluation of Swedish Environmental Assistance to Eastern Europe. Stockholm, 31 p.)
Rinne, L. 1939. Maaparanduse tähtsusest Eestis. Agronoomia, 5, lk.321–326.
Tambets, J., Külvik, M. 1996. Implementation of the Convention on Biological Diversity in Estonia. Country Report. 24 pp.
