sign in sign up
<<
Home , Ivalo (river), Lake Inari, Lapland (Finland), Southern Lapland

Biodiversity in Finnish Wilderness Areas: Aspects on Preserving Species and Habitats

Anna-Liisa Sippola

Abstract—The relatively continuous belt of wilderness and na- wintering areas, and changes at the global level (for ex- ture conservation areas in northern forms an ecological ample, global climate change and pollution.) corridor between the vast forests of Siberia and the pro- tected areas of the . This corridor has a special importance for the movement and habitat of large preda- The Importance of Finnish tors, and it enables the gene exchange of other taiga species. Many Wilderness Areas on the human uses, such as husbandry, hunting, fishing, for- Biogeographical Scale ______estry, and mineral prospecting affect the diversity of plant and animal species in wilderness areas. The effects of these uses and Representativeness of the Wilderness the means to control them are discussed in this paper. Areas on the National Level

The biogeographical location in Finland is between the Three main factors affect the biological diversity of the hemiboreal zone in the southwestern part of the country and Finnish wilderness areas: the geographical location of the the subarctic zone in the northernmost region of areas, the use of natural resources within them, and the (fig. 1). Variation in the natural conditions from the south to environmental changes outside the areas. The geographical the north is considerable; the annual mean temperature location of the present wilderness areas is determined by the decreases from more than 5.5 ∞C to less than 2 ∞C, and the history of permanent settlement and effective land use, length of the growing season, respectively, from 180 days to which spread from the south to the north. At the beginning 100 days (Atlas of Finland 1988). Many species already of the 1980’s, large continuous areas of wilderness existed reach their northern distribution limit in southern Finland. only in the northernmost part of the country. The plans to Only half of the country’s 1,400 vascular plants, and one- use these areas for commercial forestry gave birth to a quarter of its microlepidoptera, are found in the northern- wilderness movement, which actively spoke and demon- most part of Lapland (Havas 1983). strated for the preservation of these last pristine areas. The location of wilderness areas in the northernmost Public debate on the issue led to Parliament setting up a part of Finland is, naturally, reflected in the representative- committee to decide the fate of these areas, and in 1991, 12 ness of habitats when compared with the whole country. wilderness areas, with a total land area of almost 1.5 million Main portions of all of the wilderness areas are either hectares (3,706,500 acres), were established. treeless barren mountains (29 percent of the total land area) Although the remaining Finnish wilderness areas are or highland forests, where annual growth is less than 1 m3 nowadays not permanently settled, they have been used by ha–1 y–1 (22 percent). About 20 percent of the total area is humans from the time that the ice sheet of the last glacia- classified as productive forests. However, the mean annual tion retreated from Fennoscandia, about 10,000 B.C. (Lehtola growth in these forests is about 1.2 m3 ha–1 y–1, while in 1997). Many present uses of these wilderness areas, as well southern Finland it reaches more than 5 m3 ha–1 y–1 in the as conflicts in land use, originate from a historic background. most productive forests (Kuusela 1977). The most produc- Past use has also influenced biodiversity; for example, the tive forest site type—herb-rich, -dominated forest— European beaver was hunted into extinction at the end of comprises only 4 percent of the total land area of the 19th century (Rassi and others 1985). wilderness areas. In this paper, I consider the biodiversity of the Finnish The wilderness forests are dominated by Scots and, wilderness areas at two levels: (1) the ecosystem and species in some parts of the more southern areas, spruce. diversity at the biogeographical level, and (2) the effects of However, of the 12 designated wilderness areas, seven are different uses on biodiversity at the species level (table 1). found north of the Norway spruce forest line, and four north I have left out the factors that affect the outside areas, of the Scots pine forest line (fig. 2). Pubescent birch is such as environmental changes along migration routes or common in all the forest site types, and it forms the northern tree line beyond the forest line of conifers. In fertile soils, goat willow, rowan, bird cherry, European aspen, and grey In: Watson, Alan E.; Aplet, Greg H.; Hendee, John C., comps. 2000. Personal, alder can be found up to the forest line. Tree species societal, and ecological values of wilderness: Sixth World Wilderness Con- composition has an importance, especially for the biodiver- gress proceedings on research, management, and allocation, volume II; 1998 October 24–29; Bangalore, India. Proc. RMRS-P-14. Ogden, UT: U.S. Depart- sity of the lower plants and animals, and also for verte- ment of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. brates, such as bird species. Overall, deciduous trees host Anna-Liisa Sippola is Senior Scientist, Centre, University of more species than conifers, and Norway spruce hosts more Lapland, POB 122, FIN-96101 , Finland. Tel. 358-16-341 2779, fax. 358-16-341 2777, e-mail: [email protected] species than Scots pine (Esseen and others 1992; Kouki 1993; Rassi and others 1985).

48 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-14. 2000 Table 1—The effects of different uses on biodiversity in Finnish wilderness areas.

Use form Effects Organisms or species affected Overgrazing Plants, soil invertebrates Disturbance and erosion by motor vehicles Animals, especially during nesting time, vegetation Hunting of predators Large predators Hunting Decrease of populations Grouse species, predators Fishing Overfishing Mainly lake trout Fish planting Mainly whitefish prospecting Silting up of river bottoms Salmonid fishes Littering Various groups Disturbance Various groups Forestry Changes in forest structure Sedentary birds, lower plants and animals Fragmentation All organisms, especially birds and mammals Disturbance Various groups Littering Various groups Poaching Decrease of populations Large predators, moose, grouses Regulation of waters Unnatural changes of water level All fish species, especially salmonids Collection of rarities Decrease of populations Birds, butterflies, plants

Figure 1—The Finnish Wilderness Areas (black) in relation to the vegetation zones of northern Europe. The dotted area is the subarctic (or arctic-alpine) zone. Redrawn from Ahti and others (1964), Kalliola (1973), and Erä maakomitean mietintö (1988).

USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-14. 2000 49 Figure 2—The location of the Finnish Wilderness Areas (black) in relation to the northern treeline of Scots pine and Norway spruce. Redrawn from Heikinheimo (1921), Hustich (1958), and Erä maakomitean mietintö (1988). The black area in the index map shows the reindeer herding area in Finland.

At the national level, the Finnish wilderness areas do not 1990). This is especially true for species that we consider as thus represent the entire biota of the country. They have, “typical northern wilderness species,” such as wolves, wol- however, an importance in the protection of species and verines, brown bear, golden eagles, and snowy owls and habitats that typically have northern distribution. The con- gyrfalcons. servation value of the areas can be measured by the repre- sentativeness of habitats and species on a certain geographi- Importance of Finnish Wilderness Areas cal scale, or by the occurrence of endemic, rare, or endangered species. Rare species can also be found in the unproductive on the Fennoscandian Level habitats of the wilderness areas, such as barren mountains The importance of Finnish wilderness areas is empha- or dry pine forests (Rassi and others 1992; Renvall 1995; sized when they are considered on a larger scale. With the Sippola and Renvall 1998). Some of the most important boreal forests in European , the Finnish wilderness features of the Finnish wilderness, however, are its size, the and conservation areas form the western projection entity of its unbroken habitats, and the low disturbance level of the vast taiga forests of Siberia, and a corridor of natural by human beings. For many mammals and birds, the land- ecosystems between the relatively intact ecosystems of north- scape level is more important than separate habitats (Hunter western Russia and the mountain area of Norway and

50 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-14. 2000 , where the largest protected areas of these coun- Local residents have had immemorial fishing rights in tries are found. This belt of continuous habitats has an the lakes and rivers on the state-owned land in northern importance, especially in the protection of species that Finland. Many of these rights are, nowadays, questioned. need large , such as large predators and birds of Earlier, there was a separate fishing law for the three prey. It enables the exchange of genes in a larger area, thus northernmost municipalities (where most of the wilderness inhibiting genetic deterioration. It also enables the flow of areas are found) because the dispute over the immemorial new individuals when all the individuals from an area have fishing rights was not resolved. New fishing laws concerning been extirpated. This is the case with the wolf population in these three northernmost municipalities were passed in Finnish Lapland, which is mainly maintained by individu- 1996 and 1997 (Kalastuslaki 1996; Laki kalastuslain als immigrating from the Russian taiga (Rassi and others muuttamisesta 1997). This gave more rights to nonresidents 1992). Relatively little is known about the magnitude of than earlier. For example, angling and ice fishing are free in gene exchange in lower plants and animals on the land- the waters of the wilderness areas. The effects of the new law scape level. However, the genetic structure of a polyporous on fish populations are not clear, nor are all the legal aspects fungus (Fomitopsis rosea) in its fragmented, isolated envi- concerning local rights (Karhu, personal communication). ronment in Sweden was more narrow than the genetic Reindeer husbandry developed as a means of livelihood in structure of its populations in the large continuous forests of the 16th century, when the Sámi started to domesticate and the Russian taiga (Högberg and Stenlid 1997). herd wild mountain reindeer (Lehtola 1997). Reindeer are so-called “semi-domesticated” animals, which freely roam the terrain most of the year and are herded into corrals for Legislation, Administration, and Use slaughter and calf branding twice a year. The “Law on of Wilderness Areas ______Reindeer Herding” allows reindeer herding and the use of motor vehicles for herding activities in northern Finland, A separate law has established Finnish wilderness irrespective of land ownership, within the areas designated areas. Unlike many other countries, these areas are not for reindeer husbandry (Poronhoitolaki 1990). Reindeer under nature conservation legislation. The purpose of the herding has become more motorized and has developed more wilderness areas is, according to the law: “To preserve the as a commercial activity since the 1960’s. With more effi- wilderness character of the areas, to ensure the continuity of cient management methods, including winter feeding using Sámi culture and subsistence livelihoods, and to develop hay, the number of reindeer significantly increased between multiple use of the areas” (Erämaalaki 1991). Actually, the the early 1980’s and the early 1990’s. This has led to words “to preserve the wilderness character” are the only overgrazing of winter pastures in many areas (Kumpula and words that refer to the protection of nature in the wilder- others 1998). nesses. The other purposes, especially the goal to develop Gold prospecting started in the mid 19th century in the multiple use of the areas, can even be contradictory to north central Lapland (Luhta 1995). The “Mining Law” the goal of preservation. (Kaivoslaki 1965) allows for prospecting minerals, but open- The more specific orders in the legislation have elements ing a mine in the wilderness without the permission of that can either promote or hinder the conservation of bio- Parliament is forbidden (Erämaalaki 1991). Gold prospect- diversity. It is prohibited to construct roads or to open a ing, both with traditional methods and by using motorized mine in a wilderness. However, the government can give earth-moving equipment, such as Caterpillars, mainly takes special permission for both activities if they are of special place in the Hammastunturi wilderness area. importance for livelihood or general interest. It is not al- The main issue that triggered the debate over wilderness lowed to give, sell, or rent the land area without the permis- preservation in the 1980’s was the threat of commercial sion of the government, except for the needs of subsistence forestry in the remaining wilderness areas. As a compromise livelihoods (Erämaalaki 1991). between the conflicting interests, the Parliament-appointed The wilderness areas are administered by the Finnish committee decided to allow forestry in part of the most Forest and Park Service (FPS), which governs most state- productive, pine-dominated wilderness forests. Separate owned land. The FPS has three divisions: Forestry, Recre- management guidelines, called the natural forest manage- ation Services (Villi Pohjola), and Nature Conservation ment method, were designated for wilderness areas. These Services. Nowadays, the first two divisions are profit-making included relatively small-scale seed tree or selective cut- organizations, but the Nature Conservation Division, tings, and the natural regeneration of trees (Metsähallitus which administers the wilderness areas, does not operate 1991). A more specific forestry designation for each area will commercially. be in the management plan. Thus far, two management Several different uses are allowed in the wilderness plans have been adopted by the Ministry of Environment, areas (table 2). Hunting and fishing are the oldest forms of and the first logging in wilderness areas was done in 1997. use of the wilderness. Due to its historic background, Of the other laws affecting biodiversity in wilderness hunting is allowed without permission or fee in the state- areas, the “Law on Terrain Driving” has importance. owned land within the home municipalities of local resi- According to this law, the use of a motor vehicle on terrain, dents in northern Finland, except in strict nature reserves without the permission of the landowner, is prohibited (Metsästyslaki 1993). The FPS (Villi Pohjola) sells hunting (Maastoliikennelaki 1995). Getting permission for subsis- licenses for wilderness areas to nonresidents. This has tence use, such as hunting or fishing, is possible. Reindeer caused conflicts between the FPS and local residents in herders can use terrain vehicles, such as four wheelers, some regions where game populations are weak (Lapin motorbikes, and snowmobiles, in their herding activities— Kansa 1998a,b). both during winter and summer (Maastoliikennelaki 1995).

USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-14. 2000 51 Table 2—The threatened mammals and birds of Lapland (extinct species not included), main reasons for their threatened status, and their estimated population levels. Sources: Rassi and others (1992), Kojola (1998), Väisänen and others (1998), T. Ollila [personal communication].

Species Class of threat Reasons of rarity Estimated population level in Lapland Endangered mammals Arctic fox (Alopex lagopus) Endangered Competition with red fox, perhaps Maximum 20 individuals, last denning in sicknesses, changes in reindeer herding 1996 Wolverine (Gulo gulo) Endangered Poaching, disturbance About 60 individuals Wolf (Canis lupus) Vulnerable Hunting, poaching, disturbance About 10 individuals, no recent reports of denning from last years Lynx (Lynx lynx) Vulnerable Hunting About 40 individuals Brown bear (Ursus arctos) Vulnerable Hunting, poaching About 140 individuals Endangered birds Lesser white-fronted goose Endangered Hunting, disturbance, environmental Observations of 10 individuals in 1997, (Anser erythropus) changes in wintering areas last nesting in 1995 Shore lark (Eremophila alpestris) Endangered Environmental changes in wintering Estimated pair number 5 and migration areas, pollution White-tailed eagle Endangered Environmental pollution, forestry, About 16 pairs (Haliaetus albicilla) building, disturbance Scaup (Aythya marila) Endangered Hunting, environmental pollution Estimated number of pairs 50, nests only in the northernmost part of Lapland Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) Vulnerable Hunting, disturbance, forestry About 280 pairs Gyrfalcon (Falco rusticolus) Vulnerable Hunting, disturbance, egg collecting About 30 pairs in the three northernmost municipalities Peregrine falcon Vulnerable Environmental pollution, egg collecting About 100 pairs, population mainly in central (Falco peregrinus) Lapland (Nyctea scandiaca) Vulnerable Egg collecting, hunting, disturbance Wandering individuals in mountain areas, last nestings in 1980’s Velvet scoter (Melanitta fusca) Vulnerable Hunting, disturbance, pollution in About 800 pairs, mainly in northernmost wintering areas Lapland Lesser spotted woodpecker Rare Forestry Estimated pair number 40 (Dendrocopos minor) Merlin (Falco columbarius) Rare Environmental pollution About 1,500 pairs in central and northern Finland Hobby (Falco subbuteo) Rare Environmental pollution Southern distribution, only occasionally in northernmost Lapland Kestrel (Falco tinnunculus) Rare Environmental pollution, changes About 540 pairs in central and in agriculture northern Finland, population low in Lapland Red-throated diver Rare Ditching, disturbance, pollution, About 100 pairs mainly in northernmost (Gavia stellata) hunting Lapland Black-throated diver (G. arctica) Rare Water constructions, disturbance, About 6,000 pairs in all of Finland, in pollution northernmost Lapland 0.3 pairs/km2 water Lesser black-backed gull Rare Disturbance, hunting In the biggest lakes and in northernmost (Larus fuscus) mountains in Lapland Common scoter (Melanitta nigra) Rare Disturbance, pollution About 1,500 pairs in all of Finland, mainly in northern Finland Osprey (Pandion haliaetus) Rare Forestry, disturbance, pollution About 1,000 pairs in all of Finland, not in northernmost Lapland Dipper (Cinclus cinclus) Rare Pollution, water constructions About 3,000 pairs, mainly in northern and eastern Finland -tailed godwit Rare Egg collecting About 100 pairs in the northernmost (Limosa lapponica) mountains in Lapland

52 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-14. 2000 Tourism and recreation are small but growing activities the limit of its northern distribution in Lapland, and is not in the wilderness areas. Until now, recreation has mainly often found in the wilderness areas. The status of large been hiking, canoeing, or boating, and cross-country skiing predators is considered more thoroughly below. during the winter. Terrain driving is prohibited, but marked snowmobile routes do cross some wilderness areas. Guided tours, terrain biking, and dog teams are increasing activi- Hunting ties in the wilderness. Air transport is allowed, and it is used Legal hunting in the wilderness areas is mostly directed frequently in the summer for travel to the most popular at moose and different grouse species, including capercaillie fishing areas. The Forest and Park Service controls tourism (Scotch grouse), black grouse, willow grouse, and rock ptar- by restricting the number of cabins and other services migan. Other hunted animals include hare, pine marten, red (Hammastunturin erämaan hoito-ja käyttösuunnitelma fox, bean goose, and ducks. The grouse population signifi- 1996). cantly declined throughout the country from the 1960’s into the 1980’s, and the populations have remained low (Helle Effects of Different Uses on and Helle 1991; Helle and others 1997). No data are avail- able on the hunting pressure on grouse species in the Biodiversity of Wilderness wilderness areas. The Forest and Park Service has not Areas ______publicly released figures on the number of hunting licenses sold, making an estimate of the real hunting pressure more Reindeer Husbandry difficult. However, due to an annual census, the moose population is rather well known, and the number of animals Reindeer husbandry affects biodiversity at three levels annually killed is controlled. Besides legally killed animals, (table 1): dozens of illegal moose poaching cases are exposed every year. In 1996, 67 moose poaching cases were revealed in 1. Overgrazing affects the composition of vegetation and the province of Lapland, 38 of them occurring in munici- diversity of soil fauna. palities where wilderness areas are found (Nevala, per- 2. The use of terrain vehicles affects the vegetation and sonal communication). disturbs animal life. All large predators found in the country are included in 3. The legal and illegal killing of predators affects predator the “Red Data Book of Finland.” The estimated minimum populations. numbers of predators in the reindeer herding area (which is Studies on the effects of reindeer on vegetation and soil the entire northern region of Finland) show that the brown fauna have, in part, given contradictory results. Large bear population is in no immediate danger of extinction reindeer numbers obviously modify the forest structure by (table 2). The majority (80 percent of the total population) preventing the regeneration of birch (Helle and others 1998; lives outside the reindeer herding area (Kojola 1998). How- Hyppönen 1998; Lehtonen and Heikkinen 1995; Mäkitalo ever, most wolverines (55 percent) live within the reindeer and others 1998). The study by Kojola and others (1998) herding area, showing that the population is rather weak shows that the numbers of some soil invertebrates have (table 2). Of the lynx population, only 5 percent live in decreased in the grazed areas. The results produced by northern Finland. The worst situation is with wolves; in Suominen and others (1998), on the contrary, showed an 1998, there were an estimated 10 individuals in the reindeer increase in most soil invertebrate groups. According to their herding area, and there have been no signs of denning over results, plant diversity has also increased in moderately the past few years (Kojola 1998). Most golden eagles (about grazed areas. The authors conclude that moderate grazing 280 pairs out of 310) live in Lapland (Ollila, personal increases the diversity of plants and soil fauna, while too communication). heavy grazing is detrimental. Despite their inclusion in the “Red Data Book of Finland,” The use of terrain driving is not restricted to reindeer hunting brown bear, wolf, and lynx during the hunting herding. Fishermen, berry pickers, and persons in different season is allowed. The number of hunted animals per area is administrative and official duties also use motor vehicles on fixed annually. For example, in 1997 the quota of brown the terrain. Very little is known about the disturbance bears for northern Finland was 35. Altogether, a total of caused by motor vehicles on animal life. Disturbances dur- 22 animals were killed, 10 of these in the Province of ing nesting can obviously be harmful for birds, such as the Lapland. Besides seasonal hunting, special permission to golden eagle. Most damage to vegetation is done during the kill the predators that attack reindeer or other livestock may summer by four-wheelers. Driving is usually concentrated be granted outside the hunting season. In 1997, the Ministry on the routes leading to the fishing lakes or reindeer of Agriculture and Forestry gave permission to kill two corrals. During the planning process for the management wolves in Lapland (Kainulainen, personal communication). plan, the routes for terrain driving are planned with the No statistics exist on the numbers of illegally killed ani- local users to minimize the effects on vegetation and animal mals. Those cases that are revealed are registered in the life (Olli 1995). local police district. The local District Police Superintendent Large predators are the natural competitors of reindeer for the two northernmost municipalities (Inari and ) herders. Wolves and wolverines are considered the worst in Lapland estimates that only about half of the illegal predators, because they often kill as many animals as they hunting cases are discovered by the police, and only one-fifth can at one time. The brown bear mainly kills calves and of those are solved (Karhu, personal communication). Data weak animals, as does the golden eagle. The lynx lives at from these two municipalities show that the number of

USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-14. 2000 53 hunting crimes revealed has increased from 12 in 1990, to the prospectors. If the prospectors do not ensure environmen- 22 in 1996 (Feodoroff 1997). However, whether this increase tal care, the deposit is used to repair the damage after is due to a real increase in cases or more effective patrolling prospecting has ceased (Tuohisaari, personal communication). over the past few years is not known. Although reindeer herding clearly has a conflicting rela- tionship with predators, not all cases of illegal killing are Forestry necessarily attributable to reindeer herders. The skin and The effects of forestry on biodiversity vary, depending on meat of brown bear are especially valuable. In northern the group of organisms under consideration (table 1). The Sweden, the most common cause of death for brown bears effects of seed-tree cutting on birds, fungi, and beetles were tagged with radio transmitters was illegal killing (Kojola, studied in pine forests as a part of the Finnish Wilderness personal communication). Research Programme. The results thus far can be summa- rized as: Fishing 1. For birds, the total number of pairs, as well as the number of hole-nesters, and species confined to old-growth Three major activities have affected the fish population of forests, diminished in logging areas compared with the the wilderness waters (table 1): unlogged control plots. The number of pairs of open habitat • Overfishing and migratory species increased, while those of sedentary • Regulation of waters birds decreased (Jokimäki and Inkeröinen 1995). • Introduction of foreign species or genetic strains 2. The total yield of fungi decreased at logged sites and, in particular, the number of mycorrhizal fungi declined (Paulus Both lakes and sections of rivers are overfished. At the and others 1995). moment, overfishing is mainly a problem in some lake trout 3. The composition of wood-rotting fungi changed consid- spawning areas (Heinimaa, personal communication). Lake erably. Only half the number of original fungi species found trout is the only fish species that can be considered as a in the old-growth forest was found in the logging waste at the threatened species in some wilderness waters (Rassi and 40-year-old seed-tree cutting areas. However, the residual others 1992). The regulation of waters concerns the basin of logs from the time before logging still hosted most of the the large , and some smaller waters in the pristine forest species. The endangered fungi species dem- Hammastunturi wilderness area. The regulation of Lake onstrated different ecological tolerance to logging: some Inari has weakened the natural fish populations of both the survived in the residual logs, some had disappeared, and lake itself and the rivers in the whole basin (Heinimaa, some were able to invade the logging waste (Sippola and personal communication). Renvall 1998). Foreign fish species, mainly whitefish, have been widely 4. The total number of beetles increased immediately introduced into the natural waters of Lapland, including the after logging. In particular, the number of cambiovores and wilderness areas. The foreign whitefish strains have not, open-habitat species increased. On 15-year-old logging sites, however, reproduced in natural waters. Nowadays, only the species composition of general species had changed local strains are used for fish planting. Plantings, both for considerably. Also, the number of rare species diminished sport fishing and the needs of local consumption, are made over time (Sippola and Kallio 1995). The fragmentation and in about 100 small lakes and in some rivers where the disturbance caused by forestry were not studied in the populations have weakened. The species used are whitefish, Wilderness Research Programme. Where the logging ex- grayling, lake trout, and arctic charr (Tuunainen, personal tends into the core areas of the wilderness (such as planned communication). in the Kemihaara wilderness area), both an increase in disturbance and hunting pressure is possible. Gold Prospecting

Gold prospecting is concentrated mainly on riverbanks, Tourism and river water is used for panning. Silt and other soil There are few studies on the effects of tourism in the particles are washed into the river water and accumulate in wilderness areas. The effects are mainly noise and erosion the riverbed. This can be deleterious for the reproduction of caused by motor vehicles, littering, and the disturbance of trout and other fish species that spawn in the riverbed animals. Disturbance is mainly the result of ignorance. gravel. However, very few studies on the effects of gold However, some cases have been revealed where animals panning on fish populations exist (Heinimaa, personal com- were photographed for commercial purposes without care munication). Those prospectors that use heavy equipment, for the regulations on nature conservation. such as Caterpillars, are obliged to take water samples regularly from the waters below their work area. The local environmental district monitors the quality of the water Other Factors Affecting the Biodiversity of samples (Tuohisaari, personal communication). Wilderness Areas In addition to potential harm to the fish populations, gold prospecting also increases disturbance in nature through its Collecting the eggs of rare birds was very popular in associated terrain driving, littering, illegal hunting, and northernmost Lapland at the end of last century and the dwelling construction. The Forest and Park Service tries to beginning of this century. Evidence exists that massive egg control gold prospecting by taking a security deposit from collection has caused permanent declines in the populations

54 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-14. 2000 of some bird species, which now are threatened; the gyrfal- Erämaalaki 1991. Wilderness Act 1991. Suomen säädöskokoelma con and snowy owl, for example (Rassi and others 1985). No. 62: 129-131. [In Finnish]. Esseen, P-A.; Ehnström, B.; Ericson, L.; Sjöberg, K. 1992. Boreal Over the last few decades, the peregrine falcon has been the forests: the focal habitats of Fennoscandia. In: Hansson, L., ed. interest of egg collectors. The last known attempt to smuggle Ecological principles of nature conservation. Amsterdam: Elsevier illegally collected bird eggs from Lapland was in 1987 (Rassi Science Publishers: 252-325. and others 1992). The have increased their Feodoroff, J. 1997. Metsästysrikosten määrän kehitys 90-luvulla. cooperation in supervising cross-border nature crimes Development of hunting crimes 1990’s. Raportti, Lapin lääninhallitus. 6 p. [In Finnish]. (Karhu, personal communication). Hammastunturin erämaan hoito-ja käyttösuunnitelma. 1996. Management plan of the Hammastunturi Wilderness Area. Metsä hallituksen luonnonsuojelujulkaisuja, sarja B, No 32. Vantaa. Conclusions______72 p. [In Finnish]. Havas, P. 1983. Lapin luonto. The nature of Lapland. In: Lapin The analysis of the status of biodiversity in Finnish korkeakoulu, Lappi-kurssi. Rovaniemi: 12-87 p. [In Finnish]. wilderness areas shows that both modern uses and those Heikinheimo, O. 1921. Suomen metsänrajametsät. ja niiden vastainen käyttö. The tree-line forests of Finland and their use. that have traditional background do have negative impacts Comm. Inst. For. Fenn. 4. 91 p. [In Finnish]. on biodiversity. Hunting and fishing have mostly lost Heinimaa, Petri. 1998. [Personal communication]. September 16. their subsistence importance, and are mainly for recreation. : The Game and Fisheries Research Institute. Reindeer herding, which still has importance as a means of Helle, P.; Helle, T. 1991. Miten metsärakenteen muutokset selittävät metsäkanalintujen pitkän aikavä lin kannanmuutoksia? How livelihood, has with modernization adopted management can forest structure changes explain long-term changes in grouse practices that are not on a sustainable basis with relation to populations? Suomen Riista. 37: 56-66. [In Finnish]. the carrying capacity of nature. For forestry, the societal Helle, T.; Kajala, L.; Niva, A.; Särkelä, M. 1998. Poron laidunnuksen agreements and the contradictory goals within the manage- vaikutus tunturikoivikoiden rakenteeseen. Influence of reindeer ment organization are in conflict with the conservation grazing on the structure of mountain birch forests. In: Hyppönen, M.; Penttilä, T.; Poikajärvi, H., eds. Poron vaikutus metsä-ja goals. tunturiluontoon. Influence of reindeer on environment in moun- The effective management of biodiversity in Finnish wil- tain and forest ecosystems. Metsäntutkimuslaitoksen derness areas is much hindered by the fact that many tiedonantoja. 678: 132-141. [In Finnish]. different laws and regulations affect the use of nature and Helle, P.; Lindén, H.; Wikman, M. 1997. Metsäkanalinnut vähentyivät viidenneksen. Grouse populations declined by one natural resources. Mostly, the locus of control in the use of fifth. Riistantutkimuksen tiedote. Helsinki. 148:1-13. [In Finnish]. natural resources is outside the area or management orga- Hö gberg, N.; Stenlid, N. 1997. Fragmentation of the forest land- nization. The main means to cope with problems are super- scape and the genetic structure of wood decay fungi. In: Biodiver- vising, patrolling, and cooperation with users and interest sity in managed forests. Abstracts of the conference held in groups. According to administrative and law enforcement Uppsala, Sweden. May 29-31, 1998. Hunter, M. L., Jr. 1990. Wildlife, forests, and forestry. New Jersey: officers, the present resources are too scarce for efficient law Prentice-Hall Inc. 370 p. enforcement (Karhu, personal communications; Tuohisaari Hustich, I. 1958. On recent expansion of the Scots pine in northern 1998). Europe. Fennia. 82: 1-25. It is also evident that regional and national efforts to Hyppönen, M. 1998. Aitaamisen vaikutus koivun luontaiseen uudistumiseen poron kesälaidunalueella Rovaniemen protect wilderness species are not always sufficient. This is maalaiskunnassa. Influence of fencing on the natural regenera- especially true for migratory animals and large predators. tion of birch in the summer pastures of reindeer around Rovaniemi. Cooperation between Finland, Sweden, and Norway in cre- In: Hyppönen, M.; Penttilä, T.; Poikajärvi, H., eds. Poron vaikutus ating a common predator policy has already started, and metsä-ja tunturiluontoon. Metsäntutkimuslaitoksen tiedonantoja. communication with Russia on questions of nature conser- 678: 99-108. [In Finnish]. Jokimäki, J.; Inkeröinen, J. 1995. Effects of forestry on wilderness vation has increased. A new approach to predator policy was bird assemblages. In: Sippola, A-L.; Alaraudanjoki, P.; Forbes, B.; started in 1997, when the Finnish Parliament adopted a law Hallikainen, V. 1995. Northern wilderness areas: ecology, sus- concerning compensation for damages to reindeer calves tainability, values. Rovaniemi, Finland: Arctic Centre Publica- made by golden eagles. Earlier, the damages were compen- tions. 7: 52-58. Kainulainen, Urpo. 1998. [Personal communication]. September sated if the reindeer herders could find the carcasses and 18. Rovaniemi: Regional District of Game Management. prove that the animals were killed by an eagle. According to Kaivoslaki. The mining law. 1965. 17.9.1965/503. [In Finnish]. the new law, the reindeer herding associations will be paid Kalastuslaki. The fishing law. 1996/1045. [In Finnish]. on the basis of the number of nesting eagles within the Kalliola, R. 1973. Suomen kasvimaantiede. Plant geography of herding areas. The future will show if this is an effective Finland. Porvoo, Helsinki: Werner Soderstrom Corporation. 308 p. [In Finnish]. means to maintain larger predator populations within the Karhu, Heikki. 1998. [Personal communication]. September 3. wilderness areas. Ivalo: Inari Police District. Kojola, I. 1998. Suomen suurpetojen määräja lisääntyminen vuonna 1996. The number and reproduction of great preda- References ______tors in Finland in 1996. Riistantutkimuksen tiedote. 150: 1-8. [In Finnish]. Ahti, T.; Hämet-Ahti, L.; Jalas, J. 1964. Luoteis-Euroopan Kojola, Ilpo. 1998. [Personal communication]. September 23. kasvillisuusvyö hykkeistäja kasvillisuusalueista. On the vegeta- Taivalkoski: The Game and Fisheries Research Institute. tion zones and vegetation areas of northwestern Europe. Luonnon Kojola, I.; Helle, T.; Huhta, E.; Niskanen, M.; Niva, A. 1998. Poron Tutkija: 68: 1-28. [In Finnish]. laidunnuksen ja metsäpalojen vaikutukset maaperän Atlas of Finland. 1988. Folio 141-143. National Board of Survey and selkärangattomien lukumääriin. Influence of reindeer grazing Geographical Society of Finland. 33 p. [In Finnish]. and forests fires on the invertebrate fauna of forest soil. In: Erämaakomitean mietintö. 1988. Report of the Wilderness Com- Hyppönen, M.; Penttilä, T.; Poikajärvi, H., eds. Poron vaikutus mittee. Komiteanmietintö 1988: 39. Helsinki. 238 p. [In Finnish]. metsä-ja tunturiluontoon. Metsäntutkimuslaitoksen tiedonantoja. 678: 20-24. [In Finnish].

USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-14. 2000 55 Kouki, J. 1993. Luonnon monimuotoisuus valtion metsissä-katsaus Olli, A. 1995. Off-road traffic and possibilities to control it in the ekologisiin tutkimustarpeisiin ja suojelun mahdollisuuksiin. Pöyrisjärvi Wilderness. In: Sippola, A-L.; Alaraudanjoki, P.; Biodiversity in the state-owned forests: a review on research Forbes, B.; Hallikainen, V. 1995. Northern wilderness areas: needs and protection possibilities. Metsähallituksen luonnon- ecology, sustainability, values. Rovaniemi, Finland: Arctic Cen- suojelujulkaisuja, sarja A. No. 11. Metsähallitus. 88 p. [In tre Publications. 7: 354-364. Finnish]. Ollila, Tuomo. 1998. [Personal communication]. September 18. Kumpula, J.; Colpaert, A.; Nieminen, M. 1998. Talvilaitumet ja Rovaniemi: Finnish Forest and Park Service, Perä-Pohjola Dis- niiden kunto Suomen poronhoitoalueella. Condition of winter trict. pastures in the reindeer herding area of Finland. In: Hyppönen, Paulus, A-L.; Ohenoja, E.; Tikkinen, S.; Roitto, M.; Sippola, A-L. M.; Penttilä, T.; Poikajärvi, H., eds. Poron vaikutus metsä-ja 1995. The influence of forest felling on the fruitbody production of tunturiluontoon. Metsäntutkimuslaitoksen tiedonantoja. 678: larger fungi in northern Lapland. In: Sippola, A-L.; Alaraudanjoki, 122-131. [In Finnish]. P.; Forbes, B.; Hallikainen, V. 1995. Northern wilderness areas: Kuusela, K. 1977. Suomen metsien kasvu ja puutavaralajirakenne ecology, sustainability, values. Rovaniemi, Finland: Arctic Cen- sekäniiden alueellisuus vuosina. 1970-1976. Increment and tim- tre Publications. 7: 44-51. ber assortment structure and their regionality in the forests of Poronhoitolaki. 1990. The reindeer herding law. Suomen Finland in 1970-1976. Folia Forestalia. 320. [In Finnish with Säädöskokoelma N:o 848/1990. [In Finnish]. English summary]. Rassi, P.; Alanen, A.; Kemppainen, E.; Vickholm, M.; Väisänen, R. Laki kalastuslain muuttamisesta. The law to change the fishing 1985. Uhanlaisten eläinten ja kasvien suojelutoimikunnan law. 1997/167: 1212. [In Finnish]. mietintö, osa II. Report on the endangered animals and plants in Lapin Kansa. 1998a. Villin Pohjolan metsobisnes yllätti Inarin Finland, part II. Komiteanmietintö 1985: 43. 466 p. [In Finnish]. riistaväen. The capercaille business of Villi Pohjola surprised the Rassi, P.; Kaipiainen, H.; Mannerkoski, I.; Ståhls, G. 1992. hunting society of Inari. August 26. Uhanalaisten eläinten ja kasvien seurantatoimikunnan mietintö. Lapin Kansa. 1998b. Villi Pohjola vaarantaa metsokannan. Villi Report on the monitoring of threatened animals and plants in Pohjola endagers capercaille populations. September 11. Finland. Komiteanmietintö 1991:3 0. Helsinki. 328 p. Lehtola, V-P. 1997. Saamelaiset-historia, yhteiskunta, taide. The Renvall, P. 1995. Community structure and dynamics of wood- Sami-history, society, art. Gummerus, Jyväskylä. 136 p. [In rotting Basidiomycetes on decomposing conifer trunks in north- Finnish]. ern Finland. Karstenia. 35: 1-51. Lehtonen, J.; Heikkinen, R. K. 1995. On the recovery of mountain Sippola, A-L.; Kallio, R. 1995. Species composition of beetles (Co- birch after Epirrita damage in Finnish Lapland, with particular leoptera) in different habitats within old-growth and managed emphasis on reindeer grazing. Ecoscience. 2: 349-356. forests in Finnish Lapland. In: Sippola, A-L.; Alaraudanjoki, P.; Luhta, V. 1995. Kullankaivu [Gold prospecting]. In: Tynys, T., ed. Forbes, B.; Hallikainen, V. 1995. Northern wilderness areas: Hammastunturin erämaa. Luonto ja käyttö. Metsähallituksen ecology, sustainability, values. Rovaniemi, Finland: Arctic Centre luonnonsuojelujulkaisuja, sarja A, No. 52. Metsähallitus, Vantaa: Publications. 7: 59-77. 114-120. [In Finnish]. Sippola, A-L.; Renvall, P. 1998. Wood-decomposing fungi and seed- Maastoliikennelaki. The law on terrain driving. 22.12.1995/1710. tree cutting: a 40-year perspective. Forest Ecology and Manage- [In Finnish]. ment. 115: 183-201. Mäkitalo, K.; Penttilä, T.; Räsänen, P. 1998. Poron ja jäniksen Suominen, O.; Kojola, I.; Niemelä, P. 1998. Poron vaikutus vaikutus hieskoivun luontaiseen uudistumiseen tuoreilla metsänpohjan selkärangattomiin. Influence of reindeer on the kankailla Etelä-ja Keski-Lapissa. Influence of reindeer and moun- invertebrates of the forest floor. In: Hyppönen, M.; Penttilä, T.; tain hare on the regeneration of pubescent birch in the mesic Poikajärvi, H., eds. Poron vaikutus metsä-ja tunturiluontoon. forests in central and . In: Hyppönen, M.; Metsäntutkimuslaitoksen tiedonantoja. 678: 9-19. [In Finnish]. Penttilä, T.; Poikajärvi, H., eds. Poron vaikutus metsä-ja Tuohisaari, Olavi. 1998. [Personal communication]. September 15. tunturiluontoon. Metsäntutkimuslaitoksen tiedonantoja. 678: Ivalo: Finnish Forest and Park Service, Ylä-Lappi District. 109-122. [In Finnish]. Tuunainen, Olli. 1998. [Personal communication]. September 15. Metsähallitus. 1991. Ohje erämaa-alueiden luonnonmukaisesti Rovaniemi: Employment and Economic Development Center for hoidettavien metsien käsittelystä. Forestry guidelines of the Lapland. natural forest management areas of wildernesses. 17 p. [In Väisänen, R.; Lammi, E.; Koskimies, P. 1998. Muuttuva Finnish]. pesimälinnusto. The atlas of breeding birds in Finland. Otava. Metsästyslaki. The hunting law. 28.6.1993/615. [In Finnish]. Keuruu. 567 p. [In Finnish]. Nevala, Ahti. 1998. [Personal communication]. September 25. Rovaniemi: Rovaniemi Police District.

56 USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-14. 2000