| Our ancestors knew how to
appreciate rare old objects. This explains the fact, that
even in the neighbourhood of the settlements of man
ancient trees, even stumps have survived. The development
of technics means danger for many of these relics. Yet
the nation as a whole needs the preservation of original
nature and of those objects that make a people regard
their country with deep affection and reverence.
In emphasizing the necessity of nature protection one can
proceed from three different standpoints. The first
(Rudorff) represents the opinion that nature protection
is necessary for establishing harmony in the soul of man.
Nature protection of the home and the native country.
The second theory (Conwentz) is that the establishment
and carrying out of measures for nature protection are
necessary to make possible the investigation of nature
and of one's native country.
The third theory, having come into existence after the
Great War, tries to emphasize the social-hygienic and
social-ethic elements.
In Estonia preference is given to the second theory.
After it other purposes of nature protection have been
taken into consideration.
The regulation of nature protection was started by the
members of the Society of Nature Investigators of the
Tartu University with prof. F.BuchoItz at their head. The
Estonian Nature Protection Section was founded and put
into action on the 1st April 1920. The duties of the
section were as follows: 1) The finding out of
scientifically valuable plants and woodstocks threatened
by culture, the making of an inventory and a cartographic
survey of them. 2) The possible preservation and
protection of the said floral relics. 3) The popularizing
of nature protection problems by proclamations,
communications, descriptions of the rare specimens, and
exhibitions of the collections. The members of the
section emphasized also the influence of nature
protection upon the development and the comprehension of
patriotism, thus giving a firm support to the welfare of
the nation and the deepening of national consciousness.
In the year 1920 the Ministry of Education found it
necessary to explain questions of nature protection at
schools. The Ministry of Agriculture supported nature
protection fully. Nature Protection was advertised in the
press. Data concerning protection-worthy objects were
obtained. The recording of rare trees was started. In the
year 1921 the foundation of a large preserve in the
Paasvere forest, a square of about 30 sq. km., was
planned. Particulars of the distribution of our rare
animals and birds were collected (1923). In the year 1924
a preserve was established in the Experimental Forest of
the Tartu University. The first steps were taken to
protect the yew tree in the forest district of Kärdla in
Hiiumaa etc. On the advice of the Ministry of Education
in 1928 the drafting of the Nature Protection Law was
started. In 1929 the project was submitted to the
Ministry of Education but was not ratified.
In 1931 there appeared the preliminary list of the
Estonian natural relics by G.ViIberg. This was sent to
the schools and the forestry staff, in consequence of
which the correspondence between the section and its
collaborators became more intense.
After the financial crisis; together with the
amelioration of the economical conditions, the problem of
nature protection arose again. In June 1935 the question
was started at a meeting of the Council of National
Culture and Education. Prof. dr. Lippmaa drafted a new
Nature Protection Law which, supported by the
Administration of the State Parks and the Ministry of
Education, was presented for ratification and came into
force on the 11th Dec.1935. Prof. dr. Lippmaa was elected
President of the Nature Protection Council, dr.
G.Vilbaste Nature Protection Inspector. The provisional
duty of the latter consists in controlling the districts
already under protection. He is also bound to collect
details regarding the objects worth protection and to
create a system of Trusted Advisers on Nature. Protection
all over the country. In tracing the aims of nature
protection pursued hitherto it may be noticed that in
Estonia attention is given first and foremost to smaller
districts with special phenomena. Thus every small
protection area has to serve its special purpose. The
carrying out of nature protection has shown, that it does
not consist in scientific occupation only but relies
chiefly upon administrative activity. Nature Protection
has found in the Director of the Administration of the
State Parks Mr. P.Päts, competent executive.
|