Also the forest was cleared on its own land. The owner by default can do whatever they want with their own forest. It was junk land and economic forest, not any Rivendell. Unlike to contain anything to protect.

Google cut 200 hectares, the requirement for environmental study was 150. It’s likely many Finnish companies exceeds the same threshold everyday without questions.

> The owner by default can do whatever they want with their own forest

Are you citing Finnish law here? Because where I live, this is not true. If you buy forest land, you're buying a lot of responsibilities along with it. You can mine the forest for wood some, but within parameters that ensure you won't kill it.

> The owner by default can do whatever they want with their own forest.

This is false. In Finland by default: 1) you must file a notice of any major logging in advance; 2) you need to plant the same amount of trees that you cut; and 3) zoning, key habitats or environmental impact completely prevent logging in many areas even if the land is privately owned.