Legal problems of rational use of self-forested areas

The article is devoted to theoretical and practical problems of rational use of natural self-seeding forests on agricultural land plots. Self-seeding forests are important for improving the environmental situation in Ukraine, and their preservation is one of the top priorities of our country. The author analyzes the legislative and regulatory framework in the context of using self-sown forests on privately owned agricultural land. The author distinguishes between the legal categories of “land plot with self-seeding forests” and “self-forested land plot” and also identifies the characteristic features of the latter. The author emphasizes that a land plot on which a self-sown forest grows does not automatically acquire the status of a self-forested plot. In addition, the author emphasizes the need to introduce forestry on such a land plot. The article presents a detailed study of the algorithm for classifying land plots as self-forested. Despite this, it is emphasized that the procedure for classifying a land plot as self-forested is different for land plots of private and municipal ownership. It is emphasized that the legislator grants the right to classify land plots as self-wilderness to the owner or the body that manages state or municipal land plots. Therefore, executive authorities or local self-government bodies, at their own discretion within the law, may decide to refuse to classify land as self-stocked. It is noted that from a legal point of view, the issue of rational use of self-sown forests on privately owned agricultural land is quite complex and requires legislative regulation. The conclusions emphasize the use of the principle of priority of agricultural land when addressing the issue of preserving self-sown forests on agricultural land. The author expresses his position on the preservation of self-seeding forests, which should be economically beneficial for both the owner and the territorial community. In addition, the exploitation of self-forested areas should not lead to a violation of the rules of good neighborliness. The findings may be useful for further study of this issue by scholars and practitioners.