Interest on interest criticized environmentalist Henrik Jalalian for his statements in Agenda about natural forests being rapidly logged and being completely gone in 25 years, according to a report from the Forest Agency. The writer claimed that the agency itself had rejected the conclusions of the report. According to Interest on interest, the data was still used to justify political proposals that threatened the forestry industry, restricted property rights, and would cost taxpayers billions. The writer also questioned Jalalian's reasoning about forest areas excluded from forestry and objected to natural forests being treated as a clear, scientifically established category. The writer argued that the debate should be based on facts rather than scare figures and political slogans. Interest on interest stated that forest owners maintained, utilized, and renewed the forest, and that problems within the industry were not solved by incorrect information or by casting suspicion on the entire sector. #Skogsbruk #Miljö #Politik (translated)







