Report by Amanda Bryan
ARCH Trainer Exchange – Nature Exchange 8
Apuseni Mountains – Romania: 6-13 June 2011
Description of the Exchange
The exchange was hosted by Satul Verde in Romania and explored a wide range of issues around
local and traditional forestry from woodland ownership structures and management to use of local
timber from use as a building material to wood fuel and production of local crafts and products.
The basic itinerary is provided below with further exploration of the key themes provided in the next
section.
Leaders: Monica Oprean & Martin Clark
Participants: Amanda Bryan, Robin Callander, Tess Darwin, Keith Logie & James Ogilvie
Day 1, Monday: Travel Edinburgh-Munich-Timisoara
Arrived midnight. Overnight in Hotel Perla.
Day 2, Tuesday: Timisoara-Arsenal Park-Ampoita, nr Alba Iulia
Timisoara – The city of roses.
AM: Parcul Rozelor, Roses Park. Met Renata Kaurek, Horticultural Engineer.
Report by Amanda Bryan
PM: Arsenal Park, Orăştie. Met Petre Racovita, Director General.
Overnight at guesthouse, Ampoita
Day 3, Wednesday: Girboviţa
Met Nicolae Legeanu, Forester, Alba County (since 1984).
Visited Monica’s family in village of Girboviţa: grandmother Silvia Tarca, parents Eleonora and Emil
Spinean. Owners of ~ 120 ha of Oak Forest.
Overnight at guesthouse, Ampoita.
Day 4, Thursday: Horea, Apuseni Mts
Visited local agricultural market and sawmill in Abrud.
Met Dumitru (‘Tuţu’) Giurgiu (and family), saw horselogging, abandoned wood pasture and new
timber houses in construction.
Overnight at guesthouse, Steaua Ariesului in Albac.
Day 5, Friday: To Meziad
Visited Avram Iancu memorial museum, in village of same name.
Waited in Tarsa (Gypsy) village.
Met Traian Badau, wood worker (bucket maker)(and wife).
Late lunch and wooden church in Garda de Sus.
Drove over mountains
Overnight in Meziad, limeburners village: homes of Silvia & Dumitru Vesa, and Ana & Dafin Inceu,
daughter Andreea (and grandmother).
Day 6, Saturday: Meziad
Met District Forester Adrian Stefanica (and later, wife and 2 daughters, Tania & Stefania).
Visited Meziad cave & limekiln.
Met ladder makers in village of Cresuia.
Overnight in Meziad.
Day 7, Sunday: Meziad-Timisoara 23○C
Morning in Meziad, further discussions with Adrian Stefanica.
Drove to Timisoara.
Overnight in Hotel Perla.
Report by Amanda Bryan
Day 8, Monday: Timisoara-Munich-Edinburgh
Morning in Timisoara
Visited market, many local timber products: Met Zanfina Chira, aunt of Nicolae & Calin Chira, spoon
carvers of Avram Iancu;
Returned to Edinburgh.
Key Themes Explored
Various Forms of Woodland Ownership and Management
There appears to be four key types of woodland ownership; State, Town Hall, Village and Private.
The State in any area appears to have the largest single landholding but not necessarily the majority,
this is followed by the Town Hall which would appear to be the equivalent of the Scottish Local
Authorities, there is then the Village or Community owned forests (includes ownership by churches,
schools etc.) and finally privately owned areas of forest which can range in size from just 1 or 2 Ha to
considerably more (120Ha). Often the privately owned woodland was secured by families as
payment by the state for services during the war but over time some of this has been subdivided
between family members; many families have only recently taken back ownership of their
woodlands through the restitution process. Overall responsibility for overseeing what timber is
extracted from the forest is undertaken by a District Forester and we met such foresters who
worked for both the State and a private Company. State Foresters can often have responsibility for
overseeing extraction from all forests in their area or this type of management can be carried out by
the private sector under strict regulation. All forests are covered by a 10 year Plan which largely
focuses on timber extraction plans but has as its basis a management regime which takes soil and
water management into account. Limits for timber extraction are set by the state forest research
body.
Dead wood is regularly removed from the forests in order to reduce potential for disease and private
owners are only permitted to remove dead timber for wood fuel at a rate of 2-4 Cubic Metres per
hectare. Should they wish to use green wood (from their own forests) for their own purposes then
special permission must be obtained and trees for removal will be marked by the forester. When
trees reach maturity particularly in State, Town Hall or Village owned forests they will be released to
the market for sale by tender. The majority of dead wood extracted is used for fuel and other low
value uses and clearly is utilised locally. Higher value green wood which will have the potential for
adding value through processing tends to move out of the area.
The standing timber sales largely go to private companies who are linked to or supply a range of
markets from local sawmills, larger sawmills close to more urban markets, processing factories such
as the Swiss owned plywood factory in Sebes (near Alba Iulia) and export to Germany for high value
processing into veneer. Due to the scale of these sales this means that the better quality timber is
likely to leave the local area for value adding. Local crafts people indicated that they would be able
to pay more per Cubic meter for such high quality timber but that they were unable to participate in
the tender process due to the scale of timber being marketed.
Report by Amanda Bryan
The woodlands themselves tended to be beech and oak dominated on lower slopes with Norway
Spruce prevalent at elevation, although this was reversed in some mountain areas due to an
inversion effect. There are sharp geological contrasts in the Apusenis with crystalline schists,
limestones and volcanic rocks all very prominent; the soils were largely brown earth and podzols and
free draining due to the sloping nature of the ground. Management is generally on a shelter wood
system with felling of areas of no more than 2Ha and no felling at all on slopes of greater than 45
degrees in order to maintain soil management as erosion and water management (e.g. flooding) is
clearly an issue. Extraction is through motor manual felling and use of either horses, skidders or log
chutes. Some more state of the art timber lorries were seen but on the whole the system is not
mechanised to any great extent and this would seem most likely due to lack of investment capital.
Regeneration is largely through natural regeneration although planting will occur if natural
regeneration is unsuccessful. Most trees will see 6 interventions during their life cycle. There was
little evidence of active silvicultural management improving form, most forests we saw lacked high
quality straight timber, although this is less of an issue due to its current use as wood fuel.
Hunting is also a key product and income generator of the forests but this is available to those
wealthy enough to be able to participate in local hunting clubs and afford licenses issued by the
State/Town Hall. It wasn’t clear what role sporting management played in influencing forest
management as it seems to be managed and operated separately although there is some transfer of
funds to the state (not private) forest owners. There is little dialogue between hunters and either
forest or agricultural land owners and given the hunters role in managing wildlife in order to
minimise damage to agricultural crops/ livestock this is an area of potential conflict. Should damage
occur there is little scope for private owners to secure compensation.
There is little evidence of proactive management for either recreation and access or biodiversity.
Report by Amanda Bryan
Strategic multifunctional planning (to cover economic, social and environmental aspects of forestry)
and silvicultural management are both areas where Romania might benefit from looking at working
practice in other countries such as Scotland. The way in which community and private woodlands
are utilised in Romania is an area which could inform practice in Scotland. The transfer of assets to
communities through the restitution process chimes with the dialogue on transfer of under-utilised
public assets to communities in Scotland.
Community and Local Engagement
The forest forms the backdrop to working life in Romania and provides timber for wood fuel,
housing fencing and many other every day uses as described below. It also provides a range of non
timber products particularly food such as fungi, rosehips, elder flowers and spruce for making juices
and cordials. It is a place that is visited only when necessary for utilitarian functions. The working day
is long and incomes are low so even after employment elsewhere many Romanians return home in
order to spend time tending their crops and animals which they need in order to feed themselves
throughout the year. There is therefore little time for recreation and even if there was the forests on
the whole would not be viewed as a place to provide this as they are seen as the place where
wolves, bears and boars roam. The culture therefore is that forests are a working resource. Every
forest owner has a chainsaw and while not trained and certificated they are able to fell and extract
trees for their own use (dead trees) from either their own or the village woodland. We saw little
evidence that there is an appreciation of forests as a place that holds intrinsic values relating to
health, landscape nature or spiritual well-being.
Report by Amanda Bryan
The village woodlands are managed such that every member of the village has the right to extract a
set amount of timber for their own use but for a fee which the village can then use to reinvest in
whatever developments it wishes. In Girboviţa they had transformed an old school into a village
meeting place for community events.
This active engagement means that the community is actively involved in using and managing the
woodland rather than it just being a backdrop to use in their spare time as is the case in Scotland.
The lessons from Romania regarding communities benefitting directly from woodlands are
potentially of use when considering how to get community members to more actively engage with
community owned resources such as woodlands in Scotland. Often timber is sold standing and taken
from the area and any profits reinvested directly back into the woodland. We perhaps need to
explore more ways of people actively engaging in the management, more local uses of timber
particularly if we can increase the use of wood fuel (albeit for a charge) and more investment of
possible profits into wider community projects. Can we become ‘participants’ not just ‘observers’?
Uses of Wood – Every Kind of Use and Every Kind of Wood
Everywhere we went it was apparent that timber is used extensively from house building to
transport (carts), from fencing to wood fuel and for food preparation and storage. Every type of
wood was used from spruce to oak, beech, willow and hazel and every size of tree was used. Most
villages had their own sawmill albeit of varying size, but there was ability to process timber locally.
Wood is a major resource and because it is readily available it is used extensively. I was struck by
both the wide range of uses and also that there was no wastage - while planks may be produced of
the same thickness, the width produced depended on the width of the tree at that point. Some
photos below demonstrate the diversity of uses seen.
Report by Amanda Bryan
Report by Amanda Bryan
Having observed this extensive and pragmatic use of wood as a multi-functional resource there is
perhaps a need to investigate and pilot more initiatives that could see non uniform timber use being
increased. We also need to reinvest in developing skills in using timber for everyday products.
Land Abandonment
We saw and discussed the issue of abandoned land at various points throughout the trip. There was
clear evidence of land that had been used for more intensive agriculture and ‘common grazing’ as
well as wood pasture and formerly managed orchards slowly returning to woodland with scrub and
small trees seeding in. Where unmanaged land belonged to the village the Town hall was able to
step in and take over management as we discussed in Girboviţa but there was no ready solution
when land was in private ownership. There was also an issue as to whether the state or town hall
had the resources and capacity to actively manage this land as well as it could be. Some of the land
abandonment could be accounted for by young active people leaving the area for better work
opportunities, some by a breakdown of collective activity partly as a response to the oppressive
nature of this type of activity throughout the Ceausescu period. A further issue was sub-division of
land which meant that land was being managed in smaller and more dispersed parcels. One
potential solution is to actively plant trees and convert abandoned agricultural land into forest,
however there is extensive paperwork required for this. We discussed whether it was likely that
third parties might come in and buy up either agricultural or forest land but due to the complex
mosaic of ownership patterns and a reluctance to sell land which may have only recently been
regained by the family or the community after the Ceausescu period this seems unlikely in the short
to medium term.
This is an area which clearly needs to be considered in Romania at the earliest opportunity as it is
likely to increase. In many ways a similar problem is faced by crofting communities in the North and
West of Scotland where absenteeism and lack of active land management is an issue, one which has
been exacerbated since the reduction in direct agricultural payments and the subsequent reduction
in sheep numbers. It is perhaps an issue which could benefit from a collaborative approach across a
number of countries.
Report by Amanda Bryan
Forests as an Integral Part of a Low Carbon Lifestyle
In the Apuseni mountains families have been able to maintain a lifestyle, elements of which are now
coveted by many elsewhere in the West. Low carbon energy use, accessibility of local produce,
availability of locally made products and being based in a bio diverse and largely unspoiled landscape
are now being recreated in other areas. In Romania forests are an integral part of this in terms of the
resource both for timber and food products and in terms of water and soil regulation and shelter.
The extensive use of wood fuel was apparent with wood fired central heating, tile clad stoves in
every room, water boilers in bathrooms and wood fired bread ovens shows how wood fuel can be
effectively used, particularly in rural homes where fuel poverty is a real issue.
In Scotland and elsewhere there is still a belief in many quarters that land that is put to forestry is
unproductive, particularly in terms of limiting land available for food production. The evidence in
Romania particularly when looking at systems of wood pasture still in active use and the mosaic of
woodland and agricultural land scattered throughout communities shows that this is not the case.
The communities we visited were not that dissimilar to our own Crofting communities and what we
saw acts as a demonstration of how currently poor quality land with low productivity could be made
more sustainable and productive. While the idea of forest crofts has been introduced this is linked to
areas of suitable existing woodland we perhaps need to consider this concept in relation to whole
townships and incorporating new planting. The model could be extended further to areas of
greenbelt around our cities with an extension or new form of Allotment based community
developed which would integrate both food and timber production for community use.
The Future – Forests as Part of Developing a Tourism Sector
In the region we visited there was not a highly developed tourism sector although it was clear that
visitors did come to the area from other parts of Romania and day visitors from Hungary were also in
evidence along with German cars, motorbikes and coaches. Before long this area will experience an
influx of visitors looking for new and unspoilt places to visit. The forests are an integral part of the
landscape, particularly in the mountains. It is therefore important to consider and plan for
Report by Amanda Bryan
incorporating tourism development into forest management and also to look at the role which the
forests can play in marketing the area and attracting visitors.
We saw some initial developments in this area including Arsenal Park which is a ‘holiday park’
offering accommodation and activities based around a ‘military’ theme utilising old munitions
factory buildings and a large outdoor museum of military vehicles and artefacts. This development
depends heavily on its wooded surrounds to offer a pleasant setting and also a range of activities
including cycling, paths and paintballing. We also passed through mountain resorts largely based
around skiing but which are also opening up some areas for walking and cycling although this is
limited at present.
There is not a strong culture of using the forests as a recreational resource and this is something that
will need to be planned in such a way as it does not conflict with existing forest use. Given the
complex web of forest ownership an emphasis on timber production often at a very local level and a
lack of strategic planning this is an area where experience from countries such as Scotland could
benefit development in Romania.
Potential Future Co-operation
Schools Links
My local school is based in a dispersed rural community with strong links to its environment, the
children participate in a wide range of outdoors activities and have in recent years examined
traditional agricultural practices such as crofting and they are hoping to develop links with our local
forest which will hopefully soon be under community ownership/ management. Communities such
as those we visited in Girboviţa, Horea and Meziad are in many ways similar in terms of the
challenges they face and the schools are very much an integral part of the rural community. There is
potential to develop links linking our local school Teanassie (age of pupils 5-12) (possibly also
Tomnacross) with a Middle School (age of pupils 10-14) from the Apuseni region of Romania utilising
the Comenius programme. This will be further explored with Satul Verde and possible partner
schools from August 2011 when the new school year starts.
Local Crafts Skills
During the visit we met a number of skilled local crafts workers. There is potential to facilitate
bringing one or more of these workers (bucket maker and ladder maker) over to Scotland to work
with crafts workers linked to a number of community woodlands in order to transfer skills and forge
links. This would be undertaken in partnership with Falkland Estate (Tess Darwin also a participant
Report by Amanda Bryan
on the trip), Birse (through Robin Callander) and would draw in the Community Woodland
Association. Possible funding may be available through the LEADER Programmes in the Cairngorms
and in Highland.
There is scope for additional collaborative projects but these will take time to develop. The potential
to meet again with Romanian participants on a study visit to Scotland in October 2011 will help with
the exploration of additional activities.
Dissemination Planned
I have already established the following ways of disseminating what has been learnt through the
study visit to Romania.





Photos supplied to ENRD in Brussels for use in their publications.
Presentation to Aigas Community Forest: September 2011.
Presentation to staff and students at Scottish School of Forestry, Inverness: September 2011.
Presentation to Community Woodlands Association Conference, Kingussie: Novermber 2011.
Article to be published in CWA newsletter: Woodland Voices, Autumn 2011.
Feedback on the Trip Organisation
Personally I feel that the trip was well organised and certainly met my expectations. We were
provided with information in advance about the area we were to visit and the itinerary. The
combination of Martin’s forestry expertise and Monica’s local knowledge was a good one. Monica
also did a fantastic job in terms of interpreting for extensive periods during very long days. Travel
times were much longer than would have been the case in the UK however this gave a real sense of
the challenges faced by local people and I did not mind this at all for the period we were there but
had the visit been longer it would have been hard to keep up the pace.
I would suggest that a little more in depth information about the forestry sector would have been
useful. I also found the book ‘The Essential Guide to Customs and Culture: Romania a Culture Smart
Guide by Debbie Stowe’ very useful and would recommend this to future visitors.
Personal Reflection
To a certain extent before the visit I understood a little about Romania, particularly in terms of its
unique environment and traditional agricultural practices. I had however imagined that ‘our’
definition of sustainable rural communities and retention of a low carbon economy was recognised
and there was a desire locally to ‘hang on’ to this position which many communities in Western
Europe are now trying to regain. After our visit I don’t think that is the case at all. While the people
we met very much value their sense of community and are proud of their way of life any social and
environmental benefits are achieved purely through active management of the land for utilitarian
purposes and are not overtly acknowledged. It is not hard to be blasé about such a high quality
environment when it is all you know and don’t necessarily appreciate how easy it is to lose. A
situation also experienced in many communities across the Scottish Highlands and Islands.
Report by Amanda Bryan
At present the wider social and environmental benefits of traditional land and forestry management
practices far outweigh the immediate economic benefits to rural communities in Romania and it is
the drive to secure greater economic security that will see changes in land use practice and
depopulation. While we who are in an economically favourable position can value what we have lost
and strive to either regain or maintain it, this isn’t an option for most Romanians.
Where then is the balance? – Is it possible for our communities as a whole to re-engage in an active
and holistic way rather than just use our forests for recreation and well-being? Can Romanian
communities maintain their very different woodland culture while improving their economic future?
Amanda Bryan: 21st June 2011