Forest protection - why is it sometimes controversial?

A complex field of tension between nature conservation, the climate crisis and forestry practice

Forest protection is much more than just planting new trees or protecting old, valuable stands. It also includes preventing and combating risks from pests, storms and drought. In times of climate change, these risks are increasing: Prolonged periods of drought, extreme weather and weakened tree defenses mean that insects such as bark beetles or nuns can multiply en masse. The damaged wood remaining in the forest quickly becomes a breeding ground - and threatens not only individual trees, but entire forest stands.

Why plant protection products are sometimes needed

When conventional, near-natural measures such as forest conversion, promotion of beneficial insects or mechanical removal are no longer sufficient, the use of plant protection products (PPPs) may become necessary. These agents are strictly tested and subject to strict regulations - they are the "antibiotics" of the forest: only used in an emergency and with clear consideration. Without this last resort, there is not only the threat of losing wood as a raw material, but also the loss of important ecosystem services such as drinking water protection, CO₂ storage and soil conservation.

The acceptance problem

Nevertheless, PPP use is often met with skepticism or rejection by the public. Studies in the RiKA project show that many people perceive risks more than benefits and are often unaware of the decision-making processes and protective measures behind them. Emotional headlines such as "Now it's raining poison" reinforce mistrust, while the long-term consequences of non-intervention are rarely discussed.