Miško savininkų atsakomybė už žalą aplinkai, padarytą neteisėtais kirtimais jiems nuosavybės teise priklausančiame miške: teisinio reguliavimo ir praktinio taikymo problemos Lietuvoje
LTStraipsnyje analizuojamas privataus miško savininkų atsakomybės už žalą, padarytą neteisėtais kirtimais jiems nuosavybės teise priklausančiame miške, teisinis reguliavimas, įvertinama tam tikrų atsakomybės rūšių specifika, atskleidžiamos praktinės atsakomybės taikymo šioje srityje problemos. [Iš leidinio]
ENForest is one of the most important nature's treasures. Being a constituent part of environment forests influence other components: quality of soil, air, living conditions of animals and birds depend on the condition of forests. Due to ecological, social and economical significance of forests, even the private ownership of forests has certain restrictions. First of all these restrictions have the form of legal requirements for the use and management of forests. Nevertheless environmental damage often occurs due to illegal cutting of forests (mostly in private forests). This kind of environmental damage is the most dangerous and usually the biggest if compared to other types of damage done to forests. On the other hand damage done to forest always has negative influence on other components of environment. Therefore the aim of the article is to analyze legal regulation of responsibility of private forest owners for the environmental damage, which occurred because of illegal cutting in their forest, to distinguish the particularities of different types of responsibility and the problems, arising while applying it in practice. The main factor causing problems in the application of responsibility to the owners of private forests is inaccurate, indefinite and inconsistent legal regulation. The other factor is the lack of prevention in the protection of forests. Though the duty of forest owners to protect their forest from fire, pests and diseases, illegal cutting and other damaging activities is settled in laws, this duty is not fulfilled properly. This calls for the restriction of legal regulation of prevention of environmental damage, because nowadays the legal regulation in this sphere is not motivating enough. The bigger fines for not fulfilling the duty of prevention could also influence the attitude of the forest owners. [From the publication]
