Nature needs space

No, we do not propose to simply stop logging in the entire areas of the park. We propose passive and active forest protection measures. All identified high biodiversity value areas and forests above certain heights should be protected from logging and other extractive industries and leave natural processes in these areas essentially undisturbed to respect the areas’ ecological requirements, apart from accidental interventions applied for safety reasons. All other areas will be sustainably managed, with a close-to-nature forests management system as part of the management plan, which needs to comply with local communities' needs that are not damaging to the natural values of the area, like access to firewood in case of no other alternatives. 

First, it removes pressure from the Carpathians by asking its manufacturers and FSC partners to stop sourcing wood from the best preserved forests mapped by Greenpeace as No-Logging Areas. Second, exercising its corporate power to accelerate the implementation of the EU Biodiversity Strategy 2030, which targets the protection of natural processes at a large scale.

Yes. Mountains are well-known “water towers”. They shape weather patterns and serve as a significant source of water for lowlands. The storm Boris that hit Central and Eastern Europe came from massive air fronts being forced to rise above the Carpathian Mountains and the Alps, squeezing out enormous volumes of rain. As Europe is the world’s fastest-warming continent, the extreme rainfalls are more intense because of human-caused climate breakdown. Preserving Carpathian forests will not prevent floods, but it can slow down water flow and become an essential ally in adaptation to climate change. How? Trees act like umbrellas, intercepting rainfalls in their leaves, slowing down flows of water reaching the ground, soaking up rainwater with root systems and, most importantly, preventing erosion that speeds up water runoffs into valleys. This is why, among others, we ask for no logging of steep forested slopes, restoration of old-growth forests and no new forestry roads that, according to the latest science, can increase the maximum water run-off by several percent. And with as much precipitation as we've had to deal with lately in the Central Eastern Region, that's a lot.

Based on scientific studies and inputs from partners we have been working on identifying high-biodiversity forests in the Carpathian region that hosts the most connected and nature-diverse mixed forests in the European Union. Those forest areas become a central part of our proposal for the Impossible Park Carpathians in connection to existing national parks and other forests, providing continuity for a vital ecosystem on a large scale.  

The current protection system is patchy and fragmented across different countries. While the Carpathians remain the best connected mixed forests within the European Union, the situation is changing fast, as an area the size of five football fields is lost to logging every hour. 

The protection of the best preserved forests in the Carpathians becomes a significant contribution to the implementation of the EU Biodiversity Strategy and as such is of interest of the European Union. We call upon the EU and national governments to establish wildlife protection fund to strictly protect areas of very high biodiversity value and mobilize euro-regional funds to enhance cross-border protection. 

We do not envision any restrictions for local communities unless it is agreed as part of management plan that would need to be developed in consultation with them. At the same time local forest community owners should be offered compensation for respecting no-logging protection of best preserved forests. 

If we do not preserve places like the Carpathians, their unique biodiversity will collapse, and the consequences of the climate crisis we already face will be even more dire.

At the current pace, almost 20% of the Carpathian forest canopy cover from 2000 will be lost by 2050.

We need to give nature a chance to recover and regenerate.  While the limitation of logging might initially seem like a financial loss, creating an international park can bring long-term and sustainable economic diversification (such as sustainable tourism), nature restoration, cultural preservation, and, eventually, improved quality of life.

The High Biodiversity Value Forests are the best preserved forests identified so far. They offer vital ecological services like carbon sequestration or protection from quick runoff of rainwater.

To protect the complex mountain ecosystem of the Carpathians considered part of the planetary safety net, we need to look beyond the best-preserved forests. To restore ecosystem services at a large scale, we must consider other forests in connectivity, pasture lands, or networks of rivers with water resource zones.

While mapping High Biodiversity Value Forests, we harmonised different land cover data sets with studies and our own satellite imagery-based sensing methods aligned with a tree canopy cover in the Carpathian Environmental Outlook (KEO).  The tree canopy cover is our baseline from datasets published by Hansen et al. (2013), sourced from Landsat data with 30-m resolution, where one pixel represents an area with at least 50% tree canopy coverage. All collected data sets have been cross-checked using automated and manual techniques, consulted with several experts, and followed with control field visits in randomly chosen locations. Although knowledge gaps remain, our map represents the latest High Biodiversity Value Forests collection outside national parks in the Carpathians.

After the release of the Greenpeace CEE investigation, which revealed that furniture manufacturers producing for IKEA are sourcing wood from some of Europe’s best-preserved forests in the Romanian Carpathians in April 2024, Greenpeace has had extensive discussions with representatives of IKEA. However, we have not yet reached an agreement on the necessary solutions and changes for the future of the Carpathian's forests and our planet. We are therefore increasing public pressure on the company's leadership.