Battle for the forest

On a Wednesday morning in January, the sound of a howling chainsaw echoed over Pentagon. There was no doubt anymore: Vollskogen was to be felled. As Tuntreet, we went to the forest to see it with our own eyes. After forcing our way through a thin belt of partially broken trees, we arrived at an open, bare landscape. Just a week ago, this was a dense forest. Now, large logging machines were driving over muddy remains of trees and moss, cutting down one tree at a time, and carefully placing them on pallets on the forest floor. Slowly but surely, more and more of Vollskogen is being eaten away. Now the battle for the forest is lost – right?

Journalist: Marie Tjelta
Translator: Ingrid Bjørnevik Nygaard
Photographers: Nicolai Terland and William Fredrik Bakke Dahl

Just before Christmas, the developers Opsahl Bolig As decided that they wanted to start the felling of Vollskogen as soon as possible, while the ground was still frozen. The plan is to develop the area into Ås Hageby – a residential neighbourhood in the middle of this forested valley. On Ås Hageby’s website, the project is described as an interaction between nature and buildings, with the forest being integrated as a natural part of the neighbourhood. Not everyone agrees on this, and the project is criticized for both greenwashing and for the lack of knowledge. Since the logging began, many got the impression that the battle for Vollskogen is lost, but some still hold on to hope. Tuntreet has talked with various local people from Ås – both students, experts and politicians – that fight for Vollskogen.

Bonfires and activism:

The students at NMBU have engaged themselves to save Vollskogen since 2015, but when the developers announced that they wanted to cut down the forest already this winter, it was time to get organized. Early in January 2025, a group of engaged students and other Ås citizens came together to form Vollskogen lever (Vollskogen is alive). The environmental group Natur og Ungdom NMBU has also joined the movement. Their common goal is to prevent Vollskogen from becomming Ås Hageby. The activism started with arranging weekly bonfire gatherings every Monday were everyone who cares about the cause could meat. Tuntreet has attended a few of these bonfires.

As the fire crackled while the engaged passionate souls discussed the project status and the next steps to save the forest. Arguments against the development included ecological values, an unsustainable planning solution and a potential conflict between the students and the future residents of Ås Hageby. One thing became clear through these bonfires: The hope everyone shared that it was not too late to save Vollskogen.

The lack of nature protection:

Tree with a heart: Activists marked all the protected trees that were cut with a heart.

Tuntreet contacted Mari Vold Hansen, board member in Natur og Ungdom NMBU, to get more insight for the reason they are fighting for the forest. Mari explained that since there is not another forest in close proximity, Vollskogen is a valuable natural environment for the students and an important wildlife corridor. Additionally, Vollskogen is located in a wetland area that works like a natural sponge, protecting the surrounding area from flooding. The destruction of this area can have consequences, both for nearby areas and drainage costs. Mari wonders whether the area will actually be attractive for housing, given its wet conditions: “Does anyone really want to buy a house in a swamp?”

“Vollskogen lever” also points out that the logging in Vollskogen has shown a lack of commitment to follow the regulatory plan. According to the plan, there is supposed to be considerations for wildlife, birds, salamanders, protected trees, and trees with a circumference larger than 125 cm or a diameter of 40 cm or more. On Saturday, January 25th, after logging had begun, the group carried out an action where they marked and measured protected trees that had been cut down. They also noted that consideration for the nesting boxes placed around the forest symbolizes the hypocricy.

“Vollskogen lever” believes that both Ås municipality, NMBU and Opsahl are engaging in greenwashing by claiming that they are sustainable, while at the same time continuing with this project. “Ås Hageby is a good example of capitalist greenwashing, as the project pretends to meet social and ecological needs, while at the same time reinforcing social inequality and causing ecological destruction. It is not sustainable to cut down a forest to build 200 single-family homes, and Ås don’t need more houses that people can’t afford”, the group writes on their website – vollskogenlever.noblogs.org. Mari points out that Ås municipality should rather focus on building housing for the locals. “They are building houses for people who doesn’t live here”. She explains that the new apartments in the center of Ås is vacant because they are too expensive, and that the houses in Ås Hageby are unlikely to be any cheaper. One has to limit itself and think more sustainably about how you use land. “Especially in Ås, there is great pressure on farmland. People want to protect farmland, so nature always ends up losing”.

A systematic issue:

Mari emphasizes that this form for nature destruction is a systematic issue happening all over the country. Nature gets lost and we have no overview of the extent. Despite a major disclosure of 44.000 natural destruction the last 5 years by NRK last year, the local politicians have not changed the way they use nature. “Vollskogen is a matter of principle. There are plenty similar cases around the country, and that just shows that we need a new way of looking at land use”, underlines Mari. None of those who walk here today were here in 2015 when it was decided, and Mari points out that this is a weakness in the system when it comes to land regulations in Norway. Decisions take so long that students do not get the chance to influence them, and additionally is it hard for locals to understand when they make a difference in the process. She also explains that she thinks it’s embarrassing that Ås, that earn so much from being the municipality with the sustainability-university NMBU, is not considering land-use neutrality in its municipal plan (despite neighbouring municipalities has adopted it). Mari hopes that Ås municipality will learn from this case and to not put more area to housing building without being more forward-thinking or to compensate for the lost nature.

What is happening in the politics?

Tuntreet spoke with local politicians to find out whether anything could be done politically to save the forest. Ås MDG municipal council members, Hele Haborg and Magnus Dybdal, say that Vollskogen is an important issue for them. “The fact that the municipal councils voted to cut down Vollskogen is a loss for us in Ås MDG”. Despite fighting hard against it in negotiations and on the council floor, democracy prevailed: The students’ local forest will be cut down for housing. They explain how they support the students who are fighting the stop this development, however, there is little to be done politically. “When a decision is made by the majority in a democracy, it would be undemocratic for a political party, even when we strongly disagree, to obstruct the development. However, Harborg criticizes how the case has been handled. “I think the rhetoric from those in favour of the development, saying that the decision had already been made om 2015, was incredibly problematic. It wasn’t actually decided until 2023. I believe that this kind of rhetoric created a belief that it was impossible to reverse the decision and may have stifled some engagement in the case.” Dybdahl agrees and adds that it is undemocratic for residents to have no opportunity to influence decisions when they are made over their heads. Harborg explains that she believes this is due to the complexity of development case processing. “Even though an area is zoned for development in the land-use plan, it wasn’t until 2023 that the case was fully decided. At that point, municipal council had every right to say no. Otherwise there would be no point of discussing the case in 2023”.

There is therefore little that can be done politically for Vollskogen. Perhaps the forest was already lost in 2015, when the area was rezoned for residential development? However, optimism does still exist among Ås’s residents who refuse to give up. Tuntreet reached out with forester and land manager Geir Goeffeng.

A warning from a forestry expert and land manager:

It’s not just the students who is engaged in Vollskogen, also the elders in local community is active. Former forestry-student at NLH, Geir Goffeng (89), have recently tried to warn both NMBU and Ås municipality that Ås Hageby is a bad idea.

Goffeng graduated as a forester at NMBU (formerly NLH) in 1962, with additional geology studies from UiO, and has later worked and advocated for responsible land use. “I have been lucky that hobby and career has been the same”, he laughs. He says that he has witnessed a sad development in forestry, where forests are being poorly managed because operations are outsourced to companies that have no responsibility for further forest maintenance. This leads to short-term profit-driven practices, without consideration for what will happen to the forest moving forward, something he believes is happening to Vollskogen today. He filed a complaint against the zoning plan for Vollskogen to Parliamentary Ombudsman, where he highlighted weaknesses related to health, housing, and the natural environment.

 Goffeng states that he is not personally affected by the project but has a wish for better land management in his municipality. Goffeng begins by explaining that Opsahl’s plan is unrealistic. He points out that the picture that the developers has made as a proposal for Ås Hageby is not physically possible. First, the forest is located in a relatively narrow valley in a fault zone in the bedrock with cultivated land on both sides, and Pentagon student village located above it. Any residential area would be positioned much lower than shown in the illustration, unless the current terrain is raised by several million cubic meters of solid mass. Under current conditions, Goffeng believes that this will lead to reduced well-being in several areas. In such valley-bottom conditions, where light and views are obstructed, will cold air easily accumulate, something that can lead to health and energy-related challenges for those living under these conditions. Additionally, the residents will have poor visibility and views. Vollskogen’s location has several weaknesses that he believes the planning prosess has overlooked, for example, it violates the Plan og bygningsloven (planning and building act) and § 112 of the Constitution, which states: “Everyone has the right to an environment that ensures health and to nature where productivity and diversity are preserved”. Goffeng believes that there is a lack of knowledge among politicians and developers.

 Nevertheless, the forester does not believe that all hope is lost, despite that logging has begun. He believes that they will realise how impossible it is to build in this area after the trees are cut, and that there will still be an opportunity to restore the natural landscape as long as construction has not started. He sees Vollskogen as an example of what can go wrong when expert knowledge is not applied in land management. “There is a lack of expert knowledge and more focus on catering to the special interests of those in power.” Goffeng urges students to push NMBU to take the case to Land Consolidation Courts. He believes that NMBU has been too quiet and encourage us to pressure the university to show a stronger academic stance on the matter.

With each passing day, another section of the forest disappears. Ås Hageby is becoming more and more real, while Vollskogen becomes increasingly distant. There is an disagreement in Ås as to whether the housing project is a necessity for a growing municipality or an environmentally harmful money-project. Only the future can tell who is right. But one thing is for sure: the battle for the forest is not over.