|
|
WRM Bulletin
|
|
OUR VIEWPOINT As nearly everyone knows, the world is heating up, and one of the main causes of climate change is the use of fossil fuels. Under pressure, the industrialized countries most responsible for this state of affairs made some minimal commitments to reduce their fossil fuel emissions in the Kyoto Protocol of 1997. However, some of the most polluting countries are trying to find ways out of their commitments, using potential loopholes in the Protocol which may allow them to plant millions of hectares of trees in Southern countries as a substitute for cutting emissions at source. Partly in order to assess the scientific validity of this approach, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) appointed a panel to put together a Special Report on Land Use, Land Use Change, and Forestry. The report, released in May, has disappointed many activists by giving a "scientific" stamp of approval to a carbon market which would generate profits for a small number of mostly Northern companies and consultants, allow industrialized countries to continue emitting carbon to the atmosphere, impact negatively on people and the environment in the South --and fail to slow climate change. How was it possible for the IPCC to produce such a report? Why didn't the scientists do their job properly? The answer is probably very complex, having to do with peer pressure, political influence from the US, personal ambition, and the fact that out of hundreds of authors and commentators on the report, only a tiny handful were social scientists or experienced in grassroots political realities. But one of the reason's for the report's failure is, sadly, surely quite simple: some of the authors (and the companies they work for) will benefit financially from having drawn the conclusions they drew. The following are only a few examples: Sandra Brown of the US is a Coordinating Lead Author of Chapter 5 ("Project-Based Activities") and the Summary for Policymakers of the report. Brown is Senior Program Officer for Winrock International, an Arlington, Virginia-based nonprofit organization which accepts contracts from "public and private" sources. Winrock provides forest carbon monitoring technical services to government agencies such as the U.S. Initiative on Joint Implementation and a wide range of private sector and non-governmental organizations. Pedro Moura-Costa, another important author of Chapter 5, is a UK-based executive of Ecosecurities Ltd., a consulting firm with offices in the US, Brazil, Australia and The Netherlands. Ecosecurities "specializes in the generation of Emission Reduction Credits" and stands to make large profits from its involvement in carbon forestry. Gareth Philips of the UK, another Lead Author of Chapter 5, works for Societe Generale de Surveillance (SGS) Forestry of Geneva, which earns money from designing, monitoring and certifying carbon forestry projects, including quantifying carbon impacts. SGS certifies the Certified Tradeable Offsets offered by Costa Rica and hopes to expand its work elsewhere in the carbon forestry field. Philips and SGS thus have a vested interest in arguing that quantification of the climate effects of carbon forestry makes sense. Richard Tipper of the UK, also an author of Chapter 5, is on the staff of the Edinburgh Centre for Carbon Management, a consulting company which earns money from designing, assessing and monitoring carbon forestry projects. ECCM works closely with Future Forests, which has carbon forestry contracts with Mazda, Avis, BT and other companies. ECCM staff have also been involved in a forestry project financed in part by the Federation Internationale de l'Automobile in Mexico. Using lands inhabited by highland Mayan Tojolobal and lowland Mayan Tzeltal communities, the project is designed to "offset" the 5,500 tonnes of carbon emitted annually by Formula One car racing at a price of 38,000 UK pounds a year. Mark Trexler of the US, a Review Editor of the same chapter, runs Trexler & Associates, a firm which has made money -and is likely to make millions of dollars more- by promoting and monitoring carbon sequestration and other "climate mitigation" projects. Peter Hill of the US, a Lead Author of Chapter 4 ("Additional Human-Induced Activities -- Article 3.4"), is with Monsanto Corporation. Monsanto has a large stake in genetically modified organisms, including, potentially, organisms modified to take up or store carbon more efficiently. Hill's corporation too thus stands to make increased profits as a result of the IPCC report's optimistic findings about the possibility of using land and forest projects to mitigate climate change. These and many other authors and editors of the IPCC Special Report on Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry had vested interests in reaching unrealistically and unjustifiably optimistic conclusions about the possibility of compensating for emissions with trees. They should therefore have been automatically disqualified from serving on an intergovernmental panel charged with investigating impartially the feasibility and benefits of such "offset" projects. As things stand, the report must now be shelved due to their clear conflict of interest and a new report instigated which will be free of the taint of intellectual corruption. It's official: the carbon sink approach now definitely stinks.
LOCAL STRUGGLES AND NEWS AFRICA - Chad-Cameroon: the World Bank again shows who it serves Facing strong opposition from civil society representatives, the World Bank recently approved a controversial oil and pipeline project led by Exxon-Mobil, that will link oil fields in Chad to Cameroon's Atlantic coast. The project sponsors also include Chevron and Petronas, the Malaysian state company. The total cost of the megaproject will reach U$S 3.7 billion and it will be one of the largest of its kind ever undertaken in sub-Saharan Africa. Even though the Bank argues that the project includes a programme to direct new revenues to support socioeconomic development in Chad and that environmental and social impacts of the project will be especially considered and periodically monitored, environmental and human rights groups emphasise that this megaproject will forcibly displace villagers along the 673-mile length of the pipeline as well as the Chadian villagers living near where the 300 oil wells are to be located, harm forest wildlife in the affected areas and contribute to further corruption at the government level in both countries. An added problem of the project is that it might spark the renewal of armed conflict in the oil-producing region and lead to severe human rights violations. The claim for a two-year moratorium to the project in order for Chad to develop a proper legal framework to handle the revenues and for Cameroon to establish environmental safeguards was ignored. Taking into account the negative social and environmental performance of the actors involved in the project, as well as the proven effects of this kind of megaprojects undertaken in the South in the name of "progress", the idea enthusiastically expressed by the Bank, according to which the project is "an unprecedented framework to transform oil wealth into direct benefits to the poor, the vulnerable and the environment'' is really difficult to believe. Unless the Bank considers oil companies to be poor and vulnerable and that oil exploitation and transport can in some way benefit the environment. In sum, the Bank has unfortunately once again shown who it serves. Article based on information from: D. Jackson, 7/6/2000; e-mail: djackson@gn.apc.org ; Johan Frijns, Friends of the Earth International, 9/6/2000; e-mail: frijns@antenna.nl ; Korinna Horta, 19/6/2000; e-mail: Korinna_Horta@environmentaldefense.org ; http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_6101.html
- Mozambique: Floods that originated in South Africa After the tragic floods in Mozambique, the time is ripe for people to start asking questions on what went wrong. What turned those floods into an epic disaster? What can be done to reduce the likelihood of it happening again? David Lindley, national co-ordinator of the Rennies Wetlands Project (RWP) in South Africa, explains that "the cumulative impact of human activities without regard for nature has turned the recent floods from a natural phenomenon into a man-made disaster of epic proportions. Floods are a natural occurrence but nature has lots of checks and balances for preventing them getting out of hand," he points out. "Rivers do not occur in isolation but are part of intricate wetland systems consisting of grassland 'sponges' in the upper catchment areas, to marshes, reedbeds and floodplains in the middle catchment to swamp forests and estuaries at the bottom. These and many other types of wetlands are all linked together by rivers. Grasslands and wetlands are the river's safety valves. Grasslands are incredibly effective at increasing the infiltration of rain runoff into the ground. This reduces surface runoff flowing into rivers and streams during times of high rainfall, and maximises ground water seepage into these areas in the dry periods. When a river floods, wetlands spread out the water, slow it down and absorb it like a sponge, preventing the dangerously high peaks from occurring. It is these peaks which cause most of the damage, such as washing away bridges, and flooding towns." With approximately 50% of South Africa's wetlands destroyed through poor land management, the recurrence of devastating floods can only increase. Unless what's left is sustainably managed. "What humans have done, in our infinite arrogance and lack of foresight, is to upset the integrity of our wetlands and mess with the dynamics of our rivers," Lindley says. The RWP has surveyed the upper catchment of the Sand River in Mpumalanga, for example, and found that 80% of the wetlands and most of the grasslands have been tilled for farming or overgrazed. It is no wonder that the Sand River is a raging torrent, if the upper catchment is in such poor condition. In the Northern Province, the same is true for wetlands of the Letaba River, which runs swollen and angry, overloaded with South Africa's greatest and most vital export - top soil. Vast tracts of bushveld have been overgrazed, leaving the soil bare, hard, and vulnerable to sheet erosion and flooding. This sad tale is bound to be true for those tributaries flowing into the flooding Limpopo. All over South Africa, floodwaters often have nowhere safe to go anymore. They cannot sink into the ground or be held back by marshes and floodplains. So they build up to monstrous proportions, wreaking havoc along their path and finally off loading their load of water onto land at the end of the chain -in this case the people of Mozambique. South Africa is externalizing it's cost of poor land management onto it's neighbours. Source: Article based on "Who's to blame for the floods?" African Wildlife (South Africa) Volume 53 Number 4 1999
- South Africa: Grassland ecosystem destruction by tree plantations South Africa boosts an area of 1.5 million hectares of tree plantations, mostly composed of eucalyptus and pine trees, as well as a lesser area of Australian wattle. These plantations have resulted in an important number of social and environmental impacts, most of which were highlighted during a symposium held last June 10 in Pietermaritzburg, organized by the local NGO coalition Timberwatch. Most of the impacts of tree plantations in South Africa are common to numerous countries throughout the world. However, the country has its own specificities, of which perhaps one of the least common is that plantations are occupying native grasslands. In this case, plantations are not a cause of deforestation through substitution of forests by plantations. Many people might therefore see these plantations as having less negative impacts than those implemented in forest areas. But they would be wrong. As Professor Braam van Wyk -one of South Africa's most respected botanists- clearly demostrated in his presentation at the Timberwatch Symposium, tree plantations are destroying South Africa's native grasslands, which are one of the most biodiverse ecosystems on Earth, thus being a major factor of plant biodiversity loss. At the same time, those grasslands are the home of an enormous number of animal species, which are increasingly disappearing together with the grasslands they depend upon. South Africa is therefore an exception to the rule (as are Argentina and Uruguay), in the sense that its main problem is not deforestation but afforestation. South Africa is not "planting forests" -as foresters like to portray their large-scale tree planting activities- but destroying grasslands that have evolved through millions of years. Such destruction is taking place in two ways: 1) Through large-scale monoculture tree plantations and 2) Through the invasion of alien tree species into the grasslands. In South Africa, tree plantations are implemented on a very large scale, and are concentrated in the higher rainfall areas of the provinces of Kwazulu-Natal and Mpumalanga. Few plant species are able to survive under the tree canopy and therefore few animal species are able to find food in them. At the same time, other conditions for survival and reproduction of wildlife become so modified by plantations, that many animals are forced to migrate in order to survive. Some of them are able to adapt to different environments and therefore manage to survive, though in smaller numbers. Others don't find the necessary conditions and disappear. Moreover, fire frequency is reduced in any natural grassland that may remain among plantations. Since the grasslands and their associated fauna are fire-adapted, regular burning is essential for maintaining their full biotic diversity. As stated above, South Africa has 1.5 million hectares of plantations. Additionally, it has 1.6 million hectares of what local people call "jungle gum" and "jungle wattle". These "jungles" consist of a number of alien tree species which have invaded the grasslands and are creating havoc throughout the country. Although the predominant species gives them their name ("gum" is the generic term used for eucalyptus and "wattle" for several species of Australian acacia, notably Acacia mearnsii and A. dealbata), they are composed of a large number of invasive species, which are spreading in both grasslands and forest (which is very limited in extent in Southern Africa). Eucalyptus globulus and E. grandis (from Australia), Pinus patula and P. elliottii (from Mexico and the US respectively), Melia azedarach (from Asia), Solanum mauritianum and Lantana camara (from temperate South America), Jacaranda mimosifolia (from subtropical South America) and many others are occupying increasing areas and negatively affecting plant and animal diversity, as well as causing a reduction in the availability of water in rivers and streams.. All the above problems are the result of the introduction of tree species to a country dominated by grasslands. Such mistake could be understandable in the past, but today -when the world has declared its concern over biodiversity loss and governments have made commitments to address the problem- it becomes unforgivable. In South Africa, much of the blame lies within forestry companies and the forestry professional community. Will grasslands be saved or will the whole country become a "jungle"? Given the vested interests at stake, much will depend on the work of civil society organizations and the government to put a halt to the spread of plantations and to find viable solutions to the already created problems. By: Ricardo Carrere
- Zimbabwe: a different type of top-down approach Decentralization policies regarding forest management is being considered in the last decade an alternative to the centralized model in use in most countries, which has proved to be unable to assure forest sustainability. Many countries have given municipal and provincial governments additional forest-related responsibilities, in the hope that authorities closer to the ground will understand their local conditions better, have greater capacity to monitor what goes on, and make decisions that reflect local needs. Nevertheless, this cannot be considered something good in itself since, depending on every specific process, the outcome can be more "bottom-up" or "top-down" oriented, and decentralization may or may not serve to enhance democracy and sustainable use of forests. This will depend on how much the process leads to giving previously marginalized groups greater access to power or to reinforce the power of national elites at the local level. In "Forging (Un)democratic Resource Governance Systems from the Relic of Zimbabwe's Colonial Past", Alois Mandondo, researcher at the University of Zimbabwe, examines the decentralization process in that country. During the British colonial period, the government made native chiefs responsible for enforcing certain environmental regulations. Nevertheless, those rules did not reflect local interests and the government used the system to further colonial objectives, often at the expense of the native population. As usual, local people lost out: native farmers were forced to cease commercial logging, reduce their cattle herds, and provide free workforce for soil conservation activities. According to Mandondo, this type of approach is still being adopted at present. Since independence in 1980, local authorities have continued to serve the interests of the national leaders of the ruling party instead of attending those of their own communities. Although the Rural District Council Act of 1988 gave district governments the right to enact land use and conservation laws according to local circumstances, they usually prefer to adopt the law models prepared by the national government. Additionally, communities have had few opportunities to participate in creating new rules, democratically elect their representatives and generate revenues from natural resources. In sum, the decentralization scheme in force in Zimbabwe continues to be "top down"-oriented and does not benefit local communities. Article based on information from: David Kaimowitz, 29/5/2000; e-mail: d.kaimowitz@cgiar.org ; To send comments to the author or obtain a free electronic version of the paper in English, you can write Alois Mandondo at: mandondo@africaonline.co.zw
ASIA - Laos: Vanishing forests and growing corruption The Lao People's Democratic Republic -the only landlocked country in Southeastern Asia- occupies an area of 236,800 square kilometres with a still large coverage of forests. These forests hold high levels of biodiversity, and provide the livelihoods for much of the 80% of the population that lives in the countryside. Intense deforestation is considered the main environmental problem in Laos, and associated with it a loss of natural habitats and a shortage in water supplies. In 1940 rainforests were estimated to cover 70% of the country and this figure fell to 64% at the beginning of the 1960s, and to 47% in 1989. Nowadays the government insists in saying that this figure remains firmly fixed, but a recent Forest Cover Mapping Assessment shows that forest cover reached less than 40%. Forest management in Laos is clearly unsustainable, both from the ecological and the social point of view. As usual, the government puts the blame on the weaker members of society, and is accusing the rural population -especially ethnic minorities- of provoking deforestation through shifting cultivation. As a matter of fact, population pressure is not the real problem. On the contrary, lack of transparency, corruption at different levels, absence of plans and of a code of conduct regarding forest management are at the root of the present situation. Due to the lack of openness of the whole system, it is very difficult to find out how logging operations are authorized and take place in the field. This feature extends to and affects forestry staff, who are generally not familiar with the government policy and know little of the legal framework regarding forests in Laos. Additionally, very low salaries and poor working conditions make them easily fall into corrupt practices. Ignorance and corruption operate to the detriment of forest sustainability and illegal logging reigns all over the country. Corruption is also a common practice at the highest government level: ruling communist party members and high level military figures are allocated logging quotas in different parts of Laos, completely disregarding the survival of the forests. Quotas are also wantonly granted to private contractors by provincial governments in order to finance infrastructure costs. Even though once cut the logs have to pass through several steps to leave the country, no real controls exist since bribes are routinely paid all along the process and customs check exist only on paper. Most roundwood is "exported" to neighbouring Vietnam and Thailand. The central government considers forests as an infinite source of revenues thanks to the royalties paid on harvested timber. But the chaotic situation of the forestry sector has determined that the state receives only a fraction of the expected royalties from logging. For example, between 1997 and 1998 the estimated royalties actually paid reached only 32%. To counterbalance this deficit, more intense logging is promoted, entering a vicious circle of destruction. The rural poor lose out and see the forest on which they depend quickly disappear. Brokers and saw millers come and log with no regard for basic forest practices such as leaving seed trees or creating buffer zones along water courses. Lacking many essential services, and frequently only marginally related to market economy, peasant communities are the most affected when forests are cut down. What can be done within such framework of injustice and destruction? In the present political circumstances, grassroot movements seem almost impossible. According to local spokespersons, international agencies interested in the future of the country's economy and in improving living conditions of the country's poor could contribute to initiate the necessary changes. Nevertheless, considering their failure to address the issue of logging in Laos, the international agencies -such as the Asian Development Bank, the World Bank and the IUCN- can be considered at least partly responsible for the current situation. In the meantime, shedding light on what's happening to Lao forests and people can be a good -even if insufficient- way of promoting such changes. Article based on information from: "Aspects of forestry management in the Lao PDR", Watershed Vol. 5 Nr. 3, March - June 2000; The World Guide 1997/98.
- Malaysia: Penan indigenous people and protected areas in Sarawak The concept of nature without -and in most cases excluding- people, which fed natural areas conservation theory in the past decades, is still being applied in as different countries as India (see WRM Bulletin 20) and Brazil (see WRM Bulletin 28). Even though the principles of sustainable forest management internationally adopted recognize the importance of the full participation of local communities in all levels of forest management, in several cases local dwellers are seen as a threat for nature conservation. Reality counters this vision, since they are generally directly responsible for keeping protected areas -which are their home and source of livelihoods- alive and functional. In Sarawak, a number of Penan communities in the Apoh, Tutoh, Layun and Patah areas in the Baram District, Miri Division are appealing to the State authorities to stop carrying out survey works by the Forest Departement on their traditional lands. The survey is being undertaken for the creation of the Apoh/Tutoh Forest Reserves and Maringgong Protected Forests. The claims of the indigenous peoples are based on the grounds that the affected Penan have objected -from its very beginning in 1998- the project of converting their customary lands into forest reserves, and fear that the security of their people and their vital resources in their respective areas could be jeopardised if outsiders encroached into their territories without their prior knowledge and approval. They urge the Forest Department and the Sarawak Government to cease all survey work in the affected areas immediately. The environmental NGO Sahabat Alam Malaysia (SAM) shares the concerns and anxieties raised by the affected Penan and is urging the State Government to heed to the Penans' demands and cease all survey works in the affected areas. SAM is of the view that the move to constitute large areas of lands and forests which encompass customary lands of the native communities as forest reserves or protected forests in complete disregard of the rights of indigenous communities is not only contrary to law, but would also lead to the loss of control over their lands and their own future. In most cases in Sarawak "forest reserves" and "protected forests" are anything but that: they are granted to timber companies or used for other "development" purposes. If these forests are indeed devoted to conservation proposals, they should not result in the deprivation of the native communities to their ancestral lands. SAM emphasises the need to review laws and policies which enable the extinguishment of native customary rights before any forest areas are constituted as Permanent Forest Estates (as forest reserves or protected forests). Until this happens, conflicts between the government and the communities and between the communities and the timber and plantation companies will increase. Article based on information from: "Penans appeal to Sarawak government to respect native claims", Sahabat Alam Malaysia, Press Release, 23 May 2000
- Thailand: For the authorities, reality at the Pak Mun dam does not exist Dam megaprojects have been and are being strongly resisted in Thailand due to their adverse effects on local villagers' livelihoods and lands. One paradigmatic example is that of the Pak Mun Dam, which has negatively affected 3,080 families in the area, by causing a drastic reduction in the number of fish in the Mun River, fresh drinking water shortage, an increase in the incidence of intestinal fluke, and a potential spread of schistosomiasis from snail vectors inhabiting the reservoir (see WRM Bulletin 22). On May 16th more than 1,000 protesting villagers and environmentalists occupied a lot next to the power generation plant at Pak Mun dam in Khong Chiam district. While one part of the group established a symbolic siege of the dam, another one navigated through the Mun River below the dam in 50 boats, and symbolically released a young Mekong giant catfish into the water. The action -which is part of the campaign "Let the Mun River run free" started in February 1999 to demand the river's rehabilitation (see WRM Bulletin 33)- is aimed to force the dam authorities of the Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand (EGAT) to open all eight spillways to restore the river to its original level and allow fish from the Mekong River to travel up and spawn in the Mun River once again, given that the fish ladder, which dam authorities built to allow fish to travel up the river, was a total failure. Even if the activists have emphasized that their action is non-violent, senior provincial officials have called them belligerant, and EGAT spokespersons have accused them of trespassing state's property. But in fact the action took place in complete calm and even the policemen located near the site remained at a distance. A report by the World Commission on Dams released last March coincides with the villagers' arguments in relation to the loss of up to 80% of fish population in the river. Other negative environmental and social impacts are identified as well: the affected population has never been informed of the potential effects of the project; part of the peasants' lands was flooded by the reservoir waters; natural rapids in the Chi-Mun basin have disappeared, which has affected tourism activities. Dr Tyson R Robert, a researcher at the US based Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute even considers that opening the dam gates in the rainy season -as demanded by villagers- is only a halfway solution, and advocates for the removal of the dam as the only real solution to the problem. Nevertheless, the authorities would not listen to any arguments or accept any criticism. EGAT assistant governor Supin Panyamak denied that construction of the Pak Mun dam has affected fisheries in the river, and an EGAT-hired biologist said the fish migration from Mekong to the Mun River is just a myth. How can they explain the decrease in fish stock and variety then? Regarding the other proven effects no comments have been formulated. A committee -appointed by the interior minister- to find a solution to the problem concluded last week that opening the dam's gates would help the Mun River's environment, seriously damaged by the dam construction, to return to its original state. Nevertheless, the authorities have been reluctant to follow the committee's advice, opting instead for the establishment of another committee as a way to buy time. Definitively the motto of Thai authorities determined to defend the dam seems to be: If you don't want to see it, reality does not exist! Article based on information from: Southeast Asia Rivers Network (SEARIN), 16/5/2000; e-mail: searin@chmai.loxinfo.co.th , sent by Darío Jana, 18/5/2000; owner-im-mekong@netvista.net , 8/6/2000 and 19/6/2000; "Pak Moon Dam. Study brings many ill effects into focus" by Anjira Assavanonda, The Nation, 14/3/2000.
- Vietnam: highway project would gravely affect protected areas On February 21st, Vietnamese Prime Minister Phan Van Khai approved the construction of a project to transform the historic Ho Chi Minh Trail into a 1,690 kilometres long National Highway, running from the capital Hanoi to the southern Ho Chi Minh City, former Saigon. According to the authorities, the new route would ease growing congestion on Highway 1, located along the coast, and consolidate national defence along Vietnam's western border with Laos and Cambodia. Cuban engineers belonging to the Cuban-Vietnamese joint venture construction firm VIC will participate in the project. Since the Government gave the go ahead to this project late last year, the issue has been attracting the attention of the public opinion in general, and from environmental and conservation organizations in particular. If the currently planned alignment is realized, the new national highway will cut through ten protected areas (Nature Reserves and National Parks), including the famous Cuc Phuong National Park This show of concern was the main reason for the dialogue held last May 17th at the National Environment Agency, organized by the Vietnam Forum of Environmental Journalists (VFEJ). The authorities argue that in addition to its benefits for the national transportation system, the new highway constitutes an opportunity for 28 million people of 34 ethnic minority groups -including 200 of the 1700 poorest communes- to improve their living standards. Moreover, this infrastructure is seen as a way to reduce the negative impacts of the increasingly serious flooding that is affecting the country, especially for those people living in the lowland areas, and as a way to mitigate unemployment, particularly among young people, since teams of "Youth Brigades" will participate in the construction of the road. Being this megaproject of such high strategic importance, it was expected that information on it would circulate widely. However, this has not happened. Little is known about the Ho Chi Minh Highway's Master Plan and its environmental impacts. Although some works have already started in some provinces, it is not clear how much forest will be lost or degraded, and what sort of impact the road will have on biodiversity. The secrecy with which the Ministry of Transportation and Communication is dealing with the whole thing has generated misinformation even among other governmental agencies. Concern has specially arisen on the fate of Cuc Phuong National Park, which in 1962 became the first natural protected area in the country, representing nowadays the last stretch of lowland primary forest in north Vietnam under protection. The park area can easily be connected with Pu Luong primary forests in Thanh Hoa province, which would constitute a large tract of protected woodland. But the highway project will cut the park area into two pieces. During the above referred dialogue at the NEA, it was made clear that environmental impacts of the highway on Cuc Phuong National Park are of no concern for the promoters of the project. Mr. Minh, Vice-Director of the Project, admited he ignored everything about Cuc Phuong, and Mr. Than, one of Cuc Phuong authorities, said that they were not informed when the survey team came to carry out its survey. As a matter of fact, from the very beginning little discussion on environmental issues occurred. Mr. Nguyen Ba Thu -present Director of the Forest Protection Department and former Director of Cuc Phuong National Park- said that he had never been informed about how the road will cut through the park. Fragmentation of habitats have a deletereous effect on biodiversity. There is enough evidence that new highroads are associated with negative effects on environmental integrity of forests. The case of the Amazon forest is paradigmatic to this respect. What will happen in the future is uncertain, since until now the Vietnamese government has shown little consideration for the country's forests, preferring to promote tree monocultures (see WRM Bulletins 14 and 15), and to boast nostalgic nationalist feelings. Nevertheless, at the meeting concerned voices expressed that it is not too late to avoid that the highway passes though this valuable protected area, and they denounced that the Environmental Impact Assessment -required by Vietnam's own national law- has not been performed. As part of this process, alternative routing should be considered in order to minimize negative environmental impacts. Article based on information from: "Ho Chi Minh Trail to be state's second main highway", DPA, Bangkok Post, 21/2/2000; Dharman Wickremaretne, Forum of Environmental Journalists, 18/5/2000; e-mail: sobacine@sri.lanka.net ; "Cuban engineers return to Vietnam's Ho Chi Minh trail", France Press, 8/5/2000, and Fauna and Flora International, Indochina Programme, 7/6/2000, e-mail: ffi@fpt.vn
NORTH AMERICA - Mexico: False accusations of "eco-terrorism" and "ecological crimes" Local indigenous and peasant communities are usually accused of forest degradation and are either evicted from their lands, or repressed, or both. At the same time, logging companies which benefit from deforestation, receive support from those same governments that accuse local peoples of destroying the environment. The following two cases from Mexico constitute but a drop in a sea of many such cases occuring throughout the world. The case of Rodolfo Montiel, a peasant who organized resistance against the destruction of the Sierra of Petatlán forest in the Pacific Coast state of Guerrero by multinational logging company Boise Cascade is a paradigmatic example of such resistance (see WRM Bulletin 26). Arrested in 1999 under the accusation of commiting "eco-terrorism" and subject to torture and ill-treatment since, Montiel's arrest has galvanized a coalition of environmentalists and human rights activists in his defence. In May 2000, being still in jail, he received the prestigious Goldman Environmental Prize for courageous activism and was adopted by Amnesty International as a prisoner of conscience. The conflict that has arisen between the indigenous communities living in the margins of the Montes Azules Biosphere Reserve, in the famous Lacandona Forest, and the authorities constitute another case that sheds light on environmental conflict in Mexico. More than 870 indigenous families living in the area -most of them refugees from the 1994 armed conflict in Chiapas- are being threatened with eviction by the authorities and accused of committing "ecological crimes" to the detriment of the reserve. Four out of the twelve communities involved have accepted to be ressetled in another region, under the condition that the remaining communities' right to stay at Montes Azules is respected. The latter have promised to respect the reserve and asked support for sustainable production projects. However, both national and Chiapas state authorities are turning a deaf ear to their demands. Moreover, it is feared that repression against them might occur, considering that Chiapas is still a conflictive region and that peasants are in general considered to be potential Zapatista rebels. Lately they have been accused of provoking fires in the Lancandona Forests, which proved to be false, since the Secretary for the Environment, Natural Resources and Fishing (SEMARNAP) himself admitted that there is no emergency fire situation at the Montes Azules Reserve. The Mexican League for the Defence of Human Rights is urging the authorities to defend the peasant communities' rights and to pay attention to their demands. Additionally, they addressed SEMARNAP asking it to focus on the illegal logging being carried out by large timber companies, which constitutes the real cause of forest degradation at the Montes Azules Reserve. Article based on information from: Editor Equipo Nizkor, 7/5/2000; e-mail nizkor@teleline.es ; Pat Rasmussen, Leavenworth Audubon Adopt-a-Forest, 18/5/2000; e-mail: patr@crcwnet.com
SOUTH AMERICA - Bolivia: Indigenous peoples' forests menaced by oil exploration Bolivia hosts 440,000 sq.km of rainforests, which represent 57% of the lowlands total surface in the country. Deforestation rate reaches 168,000 hectares/year, being the promotion of export crops and logging concessions wantonly granted the main causes of this problem. Environmental NGOs have frequently expressed their concern over the situation of the forestry sector in Bolivia, characterized by the disrespect to indigenous traditional territories and the inefficiency of the government to adequately address the problem (see WRM Bulletin 22). Oil exploration and exploitation is also a depredatory activity affecting Bolivian forests and forest peoples. It has recently been denounced that the company Repsol (mainly composed of Spanish capitals) has entered the Multiethnic Indigenous Territory in the Amazon Forest to perform topographic measurements prior to the drilling of the Eva Eva well. Inhabitants of the town of San Ignacio de Moxos have said that Repsol has already advanced 90 kilometres into the forest, using a road previously opened by loggers. Once more such roads are the way to further destruction of the forest. The Multiethnic Indigenous Territory is not a void space. Indigenous peoples -Trinitary, Mojeño and Chimán- live there. Since Repsol does not count on the necessary environmental license to operate, this action is but an invasion of the indigenous territory. Eva Eva, at Beni Province, is the first well the company aims to drill. The second one is the Samusabeti well, which will affect an area inhabited by the Quichua and Aymara indigenous peoples, already hit by repression against illegal plantations. In relation to the Isiboro well, at Isiboro Sécure National Park, the environmental impact assessment presented by Repsol was severely observed by the environmental authority because the special features of that protected area had been ignored. Once again Repsol is violating national and international norms regarding indigenous rights and the protection of the environment. During 1995-1998 Bolivian NGOs repeatedly denounced the company for the opening of 1,200 kilometres of seismic trails and the pollution of several water courses. Article based on information from: Vigilancia Petrolera, 29/4/2000.
- Brazil: Historic victory to save the forests The National Agricultural Council (NAC) -representing the interests of big landowners in Brazil- had been trying by all means to oppose any legal initiative to protect the country's forests, which they would systematically consider a limitation to their power on people and land. In fact, about 50% of the land in Brazil is in the hands of just 1% of the population. Last month, two projects of Forest Code were confronted in the Brazilian parliament: that of the CONAMA (National Environmental Council), which resulted from an open discussion among stakeholders (the NAC included) and provided for the protection of extensive areas of the different forest biomes existing in that country, and that of the NAC caucus -the so-called "ruralists" in the parliament- which favoured big land owners' interests, disregarding nature protection (see WRM Bulletins 29 and 34). A strong campaign at the national and the international levels took place to avoid that the rural oligarchy's manoeuvre could prosper. Brazilian environmental and social organizations, together with representatives of the opposition party, and counting on the solidarity of thousands of tokens of support coming from all around the world, denounced the project as contrary to nature and to the national interests. On May 14th, the Brazilian Congress shelved the proposal of the NAC caucus, handing the ruralists a historic defeat, since for the first time the Brazilian peoples' movement has prevailed over the ranchers' powerful lobby. The contradiction between nature conservation and economic development is an argument frequently used by the Brazilian successive governments from the 1960s military era until the present time. Under the motto: Forward, Brazil! ("Pra frente, Brasil!") the unbridled destruction of the Amazon forest, the Atlantic forest, the "cerrado", and other valuable ecosystems took place. Paradoxically, nowadays Brazil is a rich country full of poor and marginalized people, showing one of the most regressive income distributions in the world, and with entire regions completely devastated. More than "forward", the country seems to have gone backward. Fortunately things are changing in Brazilian people's minds. According to a national opinion poll focusing on proposed changes to the Forest Code, carried out between May 20 and 21 by the Vox Populi Institute, 88% of the 503 people interviewed by telephone all over the country believe that the protection of Brazil's forests should increase and not decrease, as was being proposed by the ruralist caucus in Congress. Other results are equally promising: 93% of those interviewed believe that conservation does not impair Brazil's development; 90% answered that increasing deforestation in the Amazon for the establishment of agricultural lands will probably not reduce hunger; 87% expressed that property owners who deforest should be fined, and 88% of those interviewed said they would not vote for a congressional representative who favoured increased clearcutting of Brazilian forests. For more information on this issue, please contact: Adriana Ramos, Instituto Socioambiental, e-mail: adriana@socioambiental.org or Steve Schwartzman, EDF, e-mail: schwartzman@environmentaldefense.org Article based on information from: Kenneth Walsh, Environmental Defense Fund, 18/5/2000, 2/6/2000; e-mail: Kenneth_Walsh@environmentaldefense.org
- Illegal crops in Colombia: when the solution is worse than the problem Aerial spraying to control and eradicate illegal crops in Colombia are creating severe problems to rural communities and forests, similar to those provoked by the crops themselves and by the chemicals used in drug production. Coca and poppy crops in Colombia have increased in forests despite the eradication policy that began to be applied against marihuana cultivation in 1978. In 1980 an operation to combat marihuana crops at Guajira and the aerial spraying with glyphosate resulted in the worst ecological and sanitary disaster ever experienced in the region. Unlike marihuana, coca cultivation has existed for centuries. Coca has been used by indigenous communities in the Andes, the southern region and the Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta. It was not until the mid 70s that the production of cocaine started, and nowadays Colombia is the first producer in the world. Poppy crops began in the 90s, and the area cultivated jumped from 700 hectares during the first years of the decade to 20,000 hectares in 1995. In Colombia, the destruction of tropical forests linked to cocaine production has been estimated in 240,000 hectares, while that of the Andean forest due to poppy crops to obtain heroine has reached between 70,000 and 100,000 hectares. The environmental effects of such crops begin with the clearcutting and burning of primary forests, so that water sources are exhausted and biodiversity is affected. Pesticides, fertilizers and other chemicals used wantonly modify the physical and chemical status of soils, deteriorate water courses and cause negative effects on human life, as well as the decrease and impoverishment of traditional agricultural activities. The policy implemented by the Colombian state and by the US government to combat drug production and trade has been based on the eradication of crops through massive herbicide spraying, the destruction of laboratories and landing strips and the persecution of drug traffickers. The Alternative Programme PLANTE, implemented by the government presided by Ernesto Samper, was aimed at generating alternatives to those offered to peasants by drug trafficking. This programme, even though not having achieved the expected results, has had at least better environmental and social effects. The constraints to its development were due to the lack of effective marketing for substitute legal crops, which could have made sustainability possible for rural families, and to the fact that it was only geared to small peasants. Nevertheless, the eradication policy has been mainly focused on aerial spraying of herbicides. The Colombian Drugs Agency considers that up to now there is no evidence of damages caused to human beings or to crops other than coca and poppy by aerial spraying with glyphosate. But scientific assessments performed in the last years contradict this assumption and show that the impact of this kind of aerial spraying is very significant. Chemicals used together with glyphosate -such as phosphorates- poison different species of animals, beginning with insects, amphibians and fish. Monsanto has promoted the use of Roundup -whose active ingredient is glyphosate- as environmentally sound. However, most products containing this product are made or used with an additional substance to enable glyphosate to enter the plant tissues, which give the commercial product different toxicological characteristics to those of glyphosate itself. Being a broad-spectrum herbicide, glyphosate has got toxic effects on most plant species, included those useful to human beings. In June 1999, the Yanacona indigenous people, that inhabit the region of the Macizo Colombiano in the Department of Cauca suffered from damages caused by spraying with glyphosate in plots that were not cultivated with poppy. In consequence, negotiations are now taking place between the government and the Yanacona to implement a so called Life Plan (Plan Vida). At that time, many children got sick affected by lung diseases, migraine, vomits, diarrhea, fever and conjunctivitis. Something alike happened at the Departments of Putumayo, Caquetá and Amazonas a few weeks ago, when banana, yuca and corn crops were destroyed by glyphosate aerial spraying. The Amazonas Regional Corporation had to suspend such operations. Pollution and damages that have affected rural and indigenous communities in those areas are apparent, as well as the high level of pollution in water courses and in the rainforest. Eradication using herbicides provokes an immediate side effect as well: illegal crops move to areas deep inside the forest. Peasants are forced to enter the forest and clear new areas, so that destruction expands. The American Embassy itself admitted that even though in 1998 spraying against coca and poppy crops by the Colombian Police had reached a record figure, an increase of the cultivated area in other places provoked a rise of 18% in the total area cultivated in the country, which passed from 67,200 hectares to 79,500 hectares. This means that the solution was worse than the problem and the only visible result was the further destruction of forests. Finally, according to the Plan Colombia -recently approved by the US Congress- the Colombian government will receive U$S 1,700 million to fight drug traffic in order to eradicate illegal crops in a period of five years. This plan not only promotes the use of aerial spraying with chemicals, but also introduces the use of biological agents. A research is taking place to use the fungus Fusarium oxisporum, which is said would only affect coca plants. Nevertheless, national research centres have expressed many doubts in relation to that and other characteristics of this fungus, and have communicated their concern to the Ministry of the Environment and to the People's Attorney. There are evidences showing that this fungus can attack several plant species and that it has got the capacity to vary genetically once it is freed in the forest ecosystem, so that it can even affect soil microorganisms. In such case, the proposed solution would be even much worse that the problem, because it could unleash irreversible processes entailing devastating effects on people, their crops and native ecosystems. Article based on information obtained from: Zilia Castrillón, Red de ONGs del Suroccidente del Valle del Cauca "Los Verdes", 15/6/2000; e-mail: elwey@colombianet.net
- Guyana: Malaysian investment in oil palm plantations Following a recommendation of the Privatisation Unit's Board, the government of Guyana is considering a proposal under which Primegroup Limited and Matthews Associates would take over the Wauna Oil Palm Estate in the north west region of the country, on condition that they establish a local company. Primegroup Ltd. is a major investor in oil palm development in Malaysia, ranked as the first producer in the world. Matthews Associates and its local partner are providing US$1 million in the initial investment financing and Primegroup Limited has committed itself to a capital injection of US$2.5 million in the estate. Approximately 4,000 hectares of land in the North West District will be granted to the investors at a first stage of the project. The government has said that an additional lease of 10,000 hectares will be executed in favour of the investors if the feasibility, environmental and other studies required by the work programme indicate that oil palm cultivation in the region is viable. Malaysian investment in Guyana is yet another example of the spread of monoculture oil palm plantations throughout the tropics, which is causing widespread social and environmental impacts in Asia, Africa and Central and South America, while generating very few benefits to local people. As usual, in this case the investors have given an undertaking that the level of employment will increase on a yearly basis -moving from 339 employees at the end of year one to 1,545 employees by year seven- but experience shows that employment levels in this activity is minimal and working conditions poor. Article based on information from: Fergus MacKay, Guyanas Office, Forest Peoples Programme, 15/5/2000, e-mail: fergus@euronet.nl
- Peru: logging and cocaine destroy Amazon forest and threaten forest peoples During the past months, Peru has occupied the international news headlines because of the political and institutional deterioration that is affecting the country. In line with such situation, the Peruvian Amazon forest continues to deteriorate. Oil prospection and extraction (see WRM Bulletins 1 and 8) and logging by powerful Malaysian companies (see WRM Bulletin 34) are two main causes of such degradation. The depredatory activities of local loggers, as well as illegal coca cultivation aimed at supplying the international cocaine market, further add to the problem. A small but influential number of logging contractors that operate in the area of Alto Yavarí, Galvez and Yaquerana is plundering the forest in search for precious timber such as mahogany and cedar. The entire area has been considered by the Natural Areas National Master Plan as priority for conservation. Additionally, the region is inhabited by several indigenous nations. Most of the population belongs to the Mayoruna or Matsés, and there are evidences of the existence of other non-contacted groups, as the Mayos and the Remo-Aukas. Also a group of Capanahuas indigenous people live at the headwaters of the Trapiche River. Since all of them depend mostly upon hunting of wildlife and fruit gathering to obtain food, the opening of roads in the forest, followed by the entry of external actors, means the loss of their livelihoods and a menace to their material and cultural survival. Most of exploitation contracts have been obtained through bribes. Additionally, many of the loggers are cutting at rates up to 20 times higher than the ones permitted of 100 to 200 cubic metres for each contract. Indigenous people employed to cut the trees receive miserable compensations and are conned in relation to the real volumes of extracted timber. The products leave the country illegally through the Brazilian border and are finally commercialised in the European, Japanese and US markets. It has also been informed that the area of Alto Yavari and Alto Trapiche is under the control of Colombian drug dealers, which are using roundwood trade to cover up the river transportation of fuel needed for the production of cocaine chloridrate in laboratories hidden in the heart of the forest. According to these reports, there are also several coca plantations in cleared areas. Concerned Peruvian environmental organizations have begun to organise themselves to urge the creation of a vast Indigenous Reserve, which would cover the present territory ocupied by the Mayoruna and the indigenous non contacted groups, as well as the Communal Reserve Tamshiyacu Tahuayo. However, even if the creation of such a reserve would constitute an important step forward, it would not be sufficient to ensure the conservation of Peru's Amazon forest and the survival of forest peoples, due to the current situation of political chaos and corruption reigning in the country. Article based on information from: José Alvarez, 15/4/2000; e-mail: alvarez@lima.business.com.pe
OCEANIA - New Zealand: Environmentalists victory save precious forests A 30-year campaign led by environmentalist organizations in New Zealand (see WRM Bulletin 30) has at last reached its goal, since the new government has recently introduced legislation to stop the logging of publicly-owned temperate rainforests at the West Coast, and to transform them into national parks and other conservation reserves. "These lowland forests are considered by many New Zealanders to be a unique and significant part of our natural heritage, too valuable for logging of any sort to continue," expressed Pete Hodgson -the Minister responsible for timberlands- addressing the Parliament on May 11. Even though the environmentalists regret that the government approved the logging of the rimu tree of Orikaka forest for two more years, they believe that the new legislation constitutes a victory. The government is also satisfied with this decision and considers that shortening the period of the concession operating in the area from five to two years would achieve a significant conservation gain while minimizing the risk of job losses. Not that happy is the timber industry sector, included the state owned company Timberland, which had even hired a relations company to run a secret campaign to gain support for an expansion of logging of rimu trees. Nevertheless, the reached solution is not very bad for industry, since no restriction on the amount of logging allowed in the interim has been established and additionally it will receive U$S120 million in 2002 when the operations cease. The NGO Native Forest Action has announced that it will continue campaigning against the remaining logging operations. The group intends to persuade the government to get the loggers definitively out of the priceless rimu tree forests. Article based on information from: Sandy Gauntlett, 17/5/2000, e-mail: sandygauntlett@hotmail.com Inter Press Service, 23/5/2000, sent by Pat Rasmussen, Leavenworth Audubon Adopt-a-Forest, 24/5/2000; e-mail: prasmussen@igc.org
PLANTATIONS CAMPAIGN: THE CARBON SHOP FILES - The Mount Tamalpais Declaration In May this year, the WRM held a meeting in the Mount Tamalpais area near San Francisco, California. Among many other important issues, the meeting addressed the increasing pressure to promote large scale tree plantations as a means to "offset" carbon dioxide emissions, and issued a Declaration detailing the reasons for opposing such approach. In its final paragraph, the Declaration says: "We, the undersigned NGOs, strongly support national and international efforts to address climate change, especially through energy conservation, consumption reduction, more equitable resource use, and equitable development and sharing of renewable sources of energy. We hold that a widespread trade in tree plantation "offsets", through the Clean Development Mechanism and other means, would block or undercut these necessary and urgent measures, which constitute a rare opportunity to move on from dominant and failed patterns of development. We urge governments not to include plantations as carbon sinks in the Clean Development Mechanism and to address industrial emissions separately from tree plantations. A livable climate can be assured only by a commitment to tackling the root causes of global warming." In order to strengthen opposition to carbon offset plantations, we will be sending you a separate message with the full declaration with the aim of receiving further supporting sign-ons. The Mt. Tamalpais Declaration is already available at: http://www.wrm.org.uy/english/declarations/Tamalpais.htm
- Argentina: Oil companies try to "green" their image Following an existing trend at the global level, oil companies in Argentina have enthusiastically embraced the idea of entering the carbon permits market, as an effective way to increase their profits and revamp their image to the eyes of public opinion: from the bad guys responsible for global warming to champions of forest conservation! Since 1998, the government has been making things easier for them by favouring investments in plantation projects, disregarding their impacts on the valuable grassland ecosystems that have been the natural and physical support of the country's economy (see WRM Bulletin 17). According to Patricio Montecino, general manager of Pecom Forestal (a subsidiary of oil company Pérez Companc), "nowadays it is difficult to think of an oil company without an additional forestry component" both because -according to him- forestry is a good business, and because such companies are now conscious of the need to work on solutions based on carbon sequestration. Pecom is negotiating carbon emissions permits with the German companies that are involved in the polemic Chubut-Prima Klima agreement to sequester carbon in southern Chubut Province (see WRM Bulletin 17). For Pérez Companc Company, carbon sinks are nowadays a core business. The company started to work in the forestry sector in the 1950s and at present owns 163,000 hectares of land in the provinces of Misiones and Corrientes and in the Paraná Delta region, much of which will be planted with trees. 15,000 additional hectares of pine plantations are to be set up in the next seven years in Misiones. The company's holdings in Corrientes are being planted to Pinus taeda and Pinus elliottii at a rate of 6,000 hectares per year, with the aim of obtaining raw material to feed an industry to be installed in the area in the near future. Giant oil producer YPF (formerly State owned, now privatized and associated with Repsol of Spain) is supervising the plantation of 2,000 hectares with Pinus ponderosa in southern Neuquén Province by the Corporación Forestal Neuquina (CORFONE) and planning to reach 5,000 hectares by the year 2002. Of course Shell cannot be absent in this kind of initiatives: It owns 200,000 hectares in several countries (Congo, New Zealand, Chile, Uruguay, Argentina, Paraguay), being 120,000 hectares occupied by fast-growing trees plantations. In Argentina, Shell began to operate in 1998 and its plantations are located in Buenos Aires Province, where it owns 24,200 hectares, and in Corrientes Province, occupying an area of 8,000 hectares with eucalyptus and pines, to be extended to 18,000 hectares. To create a "green image" for themselves is a very important goal of these companies' policy. Repsol-YPF boasts that its project is taking place in areas affected by erosion produced by overgrazing, and that they are not occupied by native forests, thus pretending to show its concern for environmental protection, in general, and for the reclamation of degradaded soils in particular. Shell emphasises that 2,000 hectares of native forests in its afforestation area will be left intact, and that the company aims to obtain certification according to the ISO 14001 norm so that the product can reach Northern markets. Nevertheless, such arguments are weak regarding a true conservation policy, since on the one hand it is well known that tree monocultures do not contribute to soil reclamation, and on the other hand, the effectiveness of small patches of native forest to conserve biodiversity in the midst of vast tree monocultures is very doubtful. Not to mention the poor performance of these companies (see article on Bolivia in this issue, and WRM Bulletins 1, 8 and 21) regarding environmental protection. Not to mention that the real business of these companies -oil extraction- is devastating both the local and global environment. And not to mention that while "greening" their image they are increasingly appropriating vast areas of land throughout the world. Article based on information from: Federico Parapar, Ecología y Negocios, e-mail: ecologiaynegocios@interlink.com.ar , sent by Miguel Rentería, 30/5/2000; e-mail: marem@cpsarg.com
- Australia: "carbon sink" plantations invade Tasmania The expansion of tree monocultures in Tasmania -which is paradoxically the centre of origin of Eucalyptus globulus, one of the most widely used species for establishing monocultures throughout the world- under the Clean Development Mechanisms of the Kyoto Protocol is provoking widespread concern in Australia. The Federal Government's "Plantation 2020 Vision" programme is aimed at establishing 650,000 hectares of tree plantations in Tasmania over the next twenty years. Federal and State governments in Australia have adopted a market-oriented viewpoint, according to which carbon can be sequestered in tree plantations that will be logged at a later stage for corporate profit. Not only does the National Forestry Policy promote vast tree monocultures, but it is also encouraging deforestation to give place to such plantations, with all the negative environmental impacts that this substitution implies both at the local and the global levels. The potential of old growth forests as reservoirs of large amounts of carbon are completely ignored. Instead, logging has intensified in several parts of the southern island of Tasmania, where native eucalyptus forests are being destroyed. At the same time, opposition to plantations is increasing, even under the form of radical actions such as arson and uprootings. Opposition to plantations has moved beyond the environmental sector and now includes a significant part of the rural community, particularly dairy farmers and local councils. For example, the "Communities Over Plantations" group, recently created in the north of the state, constitutes a pressure group basically composed of traditional rural community members. Dairy farmers oppose plantations because of the devaluation of properties adjoining tree plots and the social isolation caused by wall to wall plantations located in the middle of once-thriving rural communities. Additionally, county administrations have to deal with the loss of revenues from taxes resulting from the substitution of agricultural activities by tree plantations (see WRM Bulletin 26). Major actors in this carbon sink plantation process are not even Australian companies (see WRM Bulletin 15). For example, the Tokyo Electric Power Corporation (TEPCO) -part of the Mitsubishi corporate empire- established a joint venture with North Ltd to establish over 23,000 hectares of tree farms on agricultural land. This is also the case in Victoria, where a US life insurance company, John Hancock, now owns 150,000 hectares of tree plantations. The Australian NGO Native Forests Network is advocating for the adoption of more effective, realistic and non destructive practices to face the increase of carbon concentrations in the atmosphere. One of them is to stop the wasteful practice of clearfelling and burning native forests for low-value products such as woodchips. In addition to the massive amounts of carbon that are released through the initial logging of forests and subsequent so-called regeneration burning, woodchips themselves are converted into disposable commodities -such as paper- that are quickly destroyed, thus contributing to increased carbon emissions in a short space of time. A far better response to increased atmospheric carbon pollution is to maintain native forests standing in their respective sites, and promote the restoration of existing cleared or degraded forests. In the same line, the Australian Green Party has denounced that this is but a shortcut of the government to avoid addressing the necessary reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, while Greenpeace Australia considers that the Federal Government should be focusing on renewable energy and take action to cut emissions, rather than trying to reduce their effects. Article based on information from: Adam Burling, Native Forests Network, Tasmania, 5/5/2000; web site: http://www.nfn.org.au/cc.html ; "Greenpeace fights tree-planting scheme", Australian Broadcasting Company, April 17, 2000; web site: http://www.abc.net.au/pm/s119452.htm
- Uganda: Carbon sinks and Norwegian CO2lonialism Forestry companies worldwide are
enthusiastically trying to implement the idea of establishing tree plantations in Southern
countries under the Clean Development Mechanisms of the Kyoto Protocol, signed in 1997,
allegedly as a way of sequestering CO2 from the atmosphere to mitigate the effects of
global warming ... and of making good profits at the same time. Even if presented as
"environmentally friendly", the whole idea of plantations as carbon sinks is
based on weak scientific arguments and does not constitute an effective way of reducing
CO2 concentrations in the air. Additionally, it enhances the detrimental effects of the
hegemonic tree monoculture scheme at the local and regional levels. (For a complete
overview on this polemic issue see: Norway has also got on the bandwagon and has set its sights on Uganda. The Norwegian company Tree Farms established itself there in 1996, and has one afforestation project in progress. Additionally, the Norwegian Afforestation Group got the authorities' agreement on a project in November 1999. The former -which operates in the Bukaleba Reserve area under its subsidiary's name Busoga Forestry Company Ltd.- has already started a project to set up between 80,000 and 100,000 hectares of plantations of pines (P. caribaea, P. oocarpa and P. tecunumani) and eucalyptus (E. grandis). Such scheme is very similar to that adopted by the Dutch foundation FACE in the Ecuadorian Paramos (see "Dutch carbon sink plantations: adding to the problem" at: http://www.wrm.org.uy/english/bulletin/bull30.htm#vidal ) and so are its consequences. A recent research in the field performed by the Norwegian NGO NorWatch shows that both projects -and particularly the one of Tree Farms- have some very questionable aspects: both Norwegian companies have leased their land from the authorities for a bargain price, since on the one hand Ugandan authorities have virtually no capacity to assess what value the companies plan to generate, particularly through carbon trading, and on the other hand, corruption is present at the decision making level. The Tree Farms project has provoked the eviction of some 8,000 people from 13 villages -mainly farmers and fisherfolk- from their lands, that the company is now occupying, condemning them to poverty due to the loss of their livelihoods, and creating a source of social and environmental conflicts. Moreover, under the "taungya" system, local dwellers are allowed to grow maize, beans, and other vegetables between the rows of planted trees during the first few years, but, surprising as it may seem, they have to pay for this land use and, additionally, they are being exploited by the company since their weeding and managing of trees during these first years is not paid. By leasing out areas for "carbon plantations" during periods of 50 years, the country is giving away the option of changing land use in the future. The so called carbon-storing plantations have to remain as such for the foreseeable future, depriving the country's authorities of the choice of using the areas for other purposes in the peoples' interest. Additionally, Uganda will not be allowed to use these carbon sinks for its own carbon accounts when the country itself faces commitments, because the credits will already have been sold to Northern countries and companies in the rich countries. As is usually happening, the carbon account in the Tree Farms' project is uncertain, since there is no way of establishing the net amount of CO2 that could be removed and stored by tree plantations during long periods. It is even possible that they become carbon sources instead of sinks. Additionally, plantations face risks posed by fires, political unrest, and upheavals, which are factors that make it hard to guarantee that the activities will be allowed to continue without obstacles. Not to mention the impact of tree monocultures on soils, water and biodiversity, including the ability of the understorey and surrounding vegetation to remove and store CO2. It is unclear whether the Tree Farms project will survive, because of social conflicts and problems with profitability. A recent EU-financed study, covering among others the mentioned Tree Farms project, concluded that there would be a "loss-loss" situation both for forestry and the local people". NorWatch has got the view that the Tree Farms project is really a "loss-loss-loss" situation: forestry is ailing, local people are suffering, and Uganda is being "CO2lonized". In relation to the Climate Change Convention process, the Conference of the Parties will discuss -when it meets in The Hague next November- whether carbon trading based on tree plantations in Southern countries should be approved as an option to emissions reduction. In the meantime Norway, that in 1997 made the commitment that its greenhouse gas emissions for the period 2008-2012 would decrease, has actually increased them. Norwegian authorities predict that this growth will continue until 2010. For Norway, planting trees in a Southern country such as Uganda is cheaper than implementing technologies that would lead to a decrease in its own emissions. Local Ugandan poor and the global environment will pay for the costs. Sources: Article based on information from: "CO2lonialism. Norwegian Tree Plantations, Carbon Credits and Land Use Conflicts in Uganda" by Harald Eraker, NorWatch, April 2000; The Republic of Uganda, Country Report on Assessment of the Intergovernment Panel on Forest Proposals, The Forest Department, June 1998.
|
 |
|||
|
|||
|
Go to Home Page
World Rainforest Movement
Maldonado 1858 - 11200 Montevideo - Uruguay
tel: 598 2 413 2989 / fax: 598 2 410 0985
wrm@wrm.org.uy
