• Brazil: Plantar's eucalyptus plantations, carbon credits and local people
• Chile: Urgent need to reorient forestry policy from monoculture to forests
• Colombia: Oil palm plantation project threatens biodiversity in the Choco
• Ecuador: The people said no to plantations at a ministerial meeting

- Brazil: Plantar's eucalyptus plantations, carbon credits and local people

A letter with over 50 signatures from Brazilian NGOs, churches, movements and trade unions was sent to investors of the World Bank's Prototype Carbon Fund (PCF) on 26 March 2003, urging them not to buy carbon credits from the controversial Plantar project in Minas Gerais, Brazil. The letter (available at www.sinkswatch.org, also see WRM Bulletin 65) states that Plantar is neither clean nor sustainable development, that the company has continuously violated labour laws, and does not possess an EIA, though required according to the law.

In a letter dated 11 April 2003 to the PCF, Plantar refutes all criticism and concerns raised in the NGO letter, accusing WRM and the Brazilian organization FASE-ES of "tremendous lack of knowledge or understanding."

Plantar fails to acknowledge that the letter is based on in-depth investigation of the company's operations, carried out by members of FASE-ES, and documented in a report commissioned by WRM. This investigation included visits to the area as well as extensive interviews with local residents and is available at http://www.wrm.org.uy/countries/Brazil/fsc.html

As could have been expected, the company reacted by denying all the research findings and initiated a campaign at the local level, including absurdities such as claiming that "NGO's from Espírito Santo and Uruguay work for rising unemployment in the town of Curvelo" (Folha de Curvelo Newspaper, April 16, 2003). The article's subtitle states that "supported by international interests, Non Governmental Organizations elaborate erroneous report against Plantar S/A and try to block resources that would be invested in the town of Curvelo."

In view of Plantar's reaction, both FASE-ES and the WRM decided to turn down the company's invitation to meet together, and to visit instead the plantation area and listen to local residents affected by the plantations. The decision was reinforced by the fact that in his last message Luiz Carlos Goulart --the company's Sustainable Development Manager-- informed that it would not be possible to visit Plantar's plantations --alleging lack of time-- and that the meeting would be held at the company's offices. The meeting with the company thus became senseless.

The FASE/WRM representatives visited the area on May 15 and met with local people. The overall impact of the company's operations were summarized by a local woman who simply said: "Plantar finished with all we had." The meaning of that was made very clear to us by the local people that showed us around the area. Within the plantations, the only thing green were the eucalyptus saplings and trees. The rest was brown, resulting from the widespread application of the herbicide glyphosate (Round-up). The water had either dried up or had been contaminated with agromechicals, thus depriving local people with the fish they used to catch and eat. Local fauna --which constituted an important element for people's livelihoods-- had also disappeared, making the "hunting and fishing prohibited" sign posts a mockery. Hunt and fish what --said an angry local man-- if the company has killed everything?

Local people also informed about Plantar's pressure to get people to sign on to a letter of support for the company, where only people not working with or depending on the company were able --at their own risk-- to refuse signing. They also showed us the public road which the company had closed, forcing them to travel a much longer distance to reach their homes. The alleged reason for the decision to close the road, adopted with no consultation with local residents, was to avoid the dust coming from the road affecting the plants grown in the company's tree nursery!

The visit to the area simply confirmed the FASE researchers' findings and strengthened the conviction the company should neither receive FSC certification nor should it be considered within the Prototype Carbon Fund as a possible candidate for receiving carbon credits in the framework of the Kyoto Protocol's Clean Development Mechanism.

top

---

- Chile: Urgent need to reorient forestry policy from tree monocultures to forests

In these times of increasingly fast processes linked to technological development, we are also witnessing an equally vertiginous loss of natural resources due to over-exploitation enabling a way of production, consumption and lifestyle that closes a vicious circle.

In this framework, the gradual loss of native forests is not a minor question, above all because it is irreparable. In an urban context, it may be hard for the ordinary citizen --removed from the cycles and pace of nature's processes and their observation and experience-- to notice what is happening, in the case of Chile in the southern region. Perhaps when the ordinary citizen does learn about it, it may be too late.

However, before going into details, it is important to point out that what is happening in Chile is by no means an isolated case. The situation is very similar in many other countries, where monoculture tree plantation is promoted while forests continue to be destroyed and, in many cases, substituted by monocultures of alien species. It is also essential to recognize what is going on in this country, in view of the fact that the "Chilean model" is being promoted in Latin America as a successful example to be imitated by other governments, in spite of the fact that it is a model that has already shown itself to be socially and environmentally unsustainable.

Chile has signed and ratified a series of international conventions, protocols and treaties: on Biodiversity, on Desertification, on Climate Change, on the Ozone Layer, Agenda 21, the Montreal Process with the Santiago Charter and many more. These would be dead without a forestry policy and the institutionality able to put them into practice.

Additionally, processes such as the Free Trade Treaties signed recently only contribute to make forest deterioration and its possible disappearance take place faster because of the lack of regulations, and of the guidelines promoting increased tree plantations, today the second largest Chilean export product, though at the expense of its people and its environment.

Two companies concentrate over one million 300 thousand hectares covered by large-scale monoculture tree plantations and the total amount of these plantations covers 2 million, 200 thousand hectares. This issue has had an enormous social and environmental impact, causing the migration of communities in wide rural sectors and impoverishment of peasants. Delicate socio-economic problems have arisen in Auracania, where serious conflicts between forestry companies and indigenous communities and small farmers continue to take place.

To the detriment of native forests, the plantation of alien species continues to be promoted. Decree Law 701 benefits the wrongly called "reforestation," by foreseeing economic benefits, nominally reaching up to 90% of the plantation costs in the case of smallholdings in non-agricultural or degraded lands, without making practically any discrimination between forestation with native species and plantation of alien species. And now, even greater facilities exist. This year 13 million dollars have been allocated towards Forestry Security Bonds (for the plantation of pine and eucalyptus on the land of small landowners), an instrument created by the Fundación Chile together with the Wood Corporation (Corporación de la Madera), the Development Corporation (Corporación de Fomento) and the Ministry of Agriculture.

Meanwhile, the bill on native forests, which will perhaps be sent to Congress shortly, only contemplates 5 million dollars as State contribution for the first year. The Lake Region, where the forests with the most biodiversity are located, is rapidly becoming a monotonous landscape of pines and eucalyptus to supply the enormous cellulose plant presently being built by the Arauco Company in San Jose de la Mariquina.

Those denouncing this state of affairs consider that access to information, dissemination and education regarding native forests must be improved for there to be a culture of conservation and sustainable use and that in order to support the National Strategy for Biodiversity Conservation to preserve ecosystems, a list of priority sites must be urgently identified, achieving compliance with national laws and international treaties ratified by Chile for the protection of natural resources and contemplating a definition of forests with an ecological criterion.

It would seem that in Chile, no forestry policy exists (in the sense of sustainable forest use) and that what there is, is in fact is a policy aimed almost exclusively at the promotion of monoculture tree plantations. What is even worse is that this policy has been so successful that wide areas of forest have disappeared, substituted by unending lines of pine and eucalyptus, that someone very aptly defined as "planted militia": green, in line and advancing.

This lack of a policy for the conservation of forests has been corroborated in numerous reports, the latest being the Country Report 2000, carried out by the University of Chile for the National Environmental Commission (http://www.elbosquechileno.cl/infpais34.html).

The time has come to end the illusion that pine and eucalyptus plantations are "forests." Plantations are plantations and forests are forests. It is that easy. No monoculture tree plantation can fulfil any of the social and environmental functions fulfilled by Chilean forests. For this reason, the urgent adoption of a real forest legislation is urgent to ensure the sustainable use and restoration of the only Chilean forestry resource: the native forest.

Article based on information from: "Chile necesita una política forestal", Voces del Bosque, verano 2003, Nº 34, Defensores del Bosque Chileno, http://www.elbosquechileno.cl/politica34.html ; "DL 701: Aprovechar la herramienta que hay",http://www.elbosquechileno.cl/701.html , Defensores del Bosque Chileno.

top

---

- Colombia: Oil palm plantation project threatens biodiversity in the Choco

The Choco region (an area of 75,000 km2 on the Colombian Pacific coast) is a strategic ecosystem due to its natural and cultural diversity and shows the greatest concentration of biodiversity in the world as regards the number of species per hectare (see WRM Bulletin 44). Of the original area of heterogeneous forests, only 44% are still standing, mainly because of colonisation, expansion of the agricultural frontier, cattle-raising and commercial logging.

The Lower Atrato, in the basin of the River Atrato, which is part of this bio-geographical region, is in a state of alert. The People's Defence Office, in the document "Timber exploitation and Human Rights, Lower Atrato-Choco" (Explotación Maderera y Derechos Humanos Bajo Atrato-Chocó), expresses the profound concern of the members of the community councils of the Lower Atrato (Cacarica, Jiguamiando and de Curvarado, among others), over an oil palm plantation project, to be implemented in the Riosucio Municipality.

This project is to be undertaken by the Urapalma S.A. Company which is not a member of the concerted agreement on cleaner production, signed by the Fedepalma Federation, the Ministries of the Environment and Agriculture and various environmental companies.

The objective of the project is to plant 20 thousand hectares of palm trees (the Ekona and Ekona X lame varieties) in the Departments of Choco and Antioquia. The first block will be 9 thousand hectares, 6,500 belonging to Urapalma and 2,500 belonging to Asopalma (this latter company promoted by the former, in which peasants from the region are associated, and have been assigned a 5 hectare plot each.

A subsequent stage foresees the installation of an oil extraction plant in the zone for the production of 35,500 tons of raw palm oil in five years. Presently, they are in the process of setting up associations of inhabitants in the zone in Paravandocito and Munguido to sow 380 hectares. This initiative has been supported by various different bodies, such as the Ministries of Agriculture and Development, the Agrarian Bank (which allocated a loan of up to 80% of the direct costs of the operation during the unproductive stage), FINAGRO, the Investment for Peace Fund (which provides resources to the Rural Capitalisation Incentive aimed at the cultivation of oil palm) and the Government of Antioquia.

There has been no consultation process with the ethnic communities, no formalities regarding environmental viability have been undertaken, no permits for water concession or forest use have been requested from the environmental authorities having jurisdiction in the Departments of Codechoco and Corpouraba, thus ignoring the environmental and ethnic regulations applying to this zone.

Para-military groups acting in the region have served the purposes of the project, for which collective community landholding of the territories in the zone is an obstacle. In this respect, the assault against the guerrilla not only obeys a military strategy, but also an economic one for the private sector. The Inter-church Justice and Peace Commission has denounced that it is evident that no state intervention is taking place to structurally face concealed armed action through para-military forces, while the community rights of Afro-descendents are ignored and the illegal sowing of oil palm continues to enjoy armed protection.

As in so many other places in tropical regions, natural and cultural diversity is running the risk of disappearing to be substituted by large-scale monoculture tree plantations that only serve company interests, aimed at production and marketing of palm oil. And just like so many other cases, resistance to companies appropriating land is growing increasingly strong.

Article based on information from: "Alerta por Palmicultura en el Bajo Atrato", sent by Gonzalo Díaz Cañadas, Fundación Beteguma, Founder of the Citará newspaper, www.citara.ipfox.com , e-mail: periodicocitara@hotmail.com ; "Graves violaciones de derechos humanos en Jiguamiandó y Curbaradó [Chocó]", by Justicia y Paz , December 23, 2002, http://colombia.indymedia.org/news/2002/12/854.php

top

---

- Ecuador: The people said no to plantations at a ministerial meeting

In nearly all countries, large scale monoculture tree plantations have been imposed and implemented once the laws of each country have been changed in such a way as to enable national and foreign companies to obtain all kinds of benefits, such as direct and indirect subsidies, tax breaks and even soft loans and refunds for large-scale plantations. In this way, the companies have transferred their costs to already impoverished peoples in a business in which they only obtain profits, they freely use resources, good lands, water, cheap labour, and additionally, are protected by the law so no one can complain. In nearly all the countries, this has been achieved through a campaign of lies, deceiving governments and peoples and, if necessary, using methods that are not quite "democratic" such as threats, attacks and death to those who oppose them. Presently, in Ecuador, the companies are putting pressure on the government to take measures favouring them. However, the task will not be easy and the process is already showing some interesting aspects.

Contrary to what has happened in other countries, the Ecuadorian Ministry of the Environment took the excellent initiative of convening a Seminar/Workshop to formulate a "National Plan for Forestation and Reforestation", which was held between 28 and 30 April in the city of Quito. The objective of this workshop, according to the invitation sent out by the Ministry, is to formulate the plan "with comprehensive community participation," and to have the "active work of all the actors," "integrating socio-environmental and productive-economic components." In this respect, it would seem that fortunately, it will be different from other national forestry plans approved behind peoples' backs in many of our countries.

In most countries where so-called forestation plans have been imposed, these have been the product of foreign consultancies. Only as an example, it should be remembered that the Mexican National Forestry Plan was prepared by the Finnish consultancy firm INDUFOR, that the "Master Plan for the Thai Forestry Sector" was prepared by the Jaakko Pöyry consulting firm (also Finnish) and the Uruguayan Master Plan was prepared by the Japanese International Cooperation Agency. Participation was totally absent in these processes.

In spite of the Ministry's good intention of having the plan prepared in a participatory way, the business sector ensured limitation of such participation. The invited national and international conference members, mostly "experts" in large-scale monoculture tree plantations, were charged with the task of demonstrating the success of the model in countries such as Brazil, Chile and Uruguay. Amidst half-truths, graphs and numbers, in summing up they were only able to state that in their countries the areas under plantation had increased and that some companies had made a lot of money. Accentuation of economic crises in those countries, conflicts with local communities and negative economic, social and environmental impacts resulting from the expansion of monoculture tree plantations, were shown in the presentation of the only international representation that was not convened by the business community, a member of the World Rainforest Movement, specially invited by the Ministry. Thanks to this invitation, the audience had access to documented information on the countless socio-environmental impacts of monoculture tree plantations (and of the countless local struggles against them in many countries of the world), absent from the presentations of the other panel members. This strengthened the participation of indigenous and peasant communities, which in Ecuador already have sufficient examples of the impacts of this type of plantation.

Paradoxically, the community members were not invited to present their points of view. Worse still, their voices were silenced on most occasions when they stated their disagreement or attempted to include changes in the "Workshops" on "Social Forestry and Agro-forestry Activities," and "Protection Forests." However, it was in the workshop on "Industrial Production Commercial Forests" (which should have been called "large-scale monoculture tree plantations") that all opposition was limited, censured and distorted by a moderator openly inclined in favour of tree monocultures.

The few representatives of Ecuadorian civil society, peasant and indigenous organizations participating in the event with the support of the local organization "Acción Ecológica," indignant over the manipulation that most of the participants were subject to, decided to prepare a declaration that was read a few minutes before the closing of the event, in spite of the opposition of Mr. Montenegro, company director of the logging company ENDESA / BOTROSA, who shouted that "although I do not know what the organizations are going to talk about, they have no right to the opportunity to do so, as they had enough time to do so during these three days" (sic).

This declaration (the full text can be found on our web page at http://www.wrm.org.uy/paises/Ecuador/DeclaraciondeQuito.rtf ) the signatories made public their gratitude to the Ministry of the Environment for the initiative but lamented the fact that the methodology did not facilitate participation and that the logging companies had monopolized the event, which had turned into a "forum to promote industrial plantations, ignoring complaints, arguments and proposals made by the communities which recognize industrial tree plantations to be one of the major threats to our native forests, our welfare and even our survival."

Furthermore, the declaration provided concrete examples in which large-scale commercial tree plantations in Ecuador have not been a development alternative, but on the contrary, have caused problems such as deforestation, diminishing water sources, reduced soil fertility, biodiversity loss, appropriation of community lands, increased risk of fires and reduction of conservation areas.

The signatory organizations also considered that "a participatory process should be initiated, in which the communities take part with a view to preparing a National Plan on Conservation and Sustainable Management of Natural Resources, which would include conservation, regeneration and restoration strategies for forests and other natural areas, particularly for the protection of water sources, flora and fauna and soil, because plantations are not forests."

Summing up, the recent event held in Ecuador has been a very important experience. On the one hand because the government sponsored a participatory process opening doors to actors normally left out, such as indigenous and peasant communities. On the other, because it showed the manipulating powers of the logging sector, which took over the event and attempted to place it at the service of its corporate interests. Also because the sectors really interested in environmental conservation and in the equitable distribution of benefits from the sustainable use of natural resources were finally able to overcome the obstacles and make their voice heard. It is hoped that the government --that will surely be subject to enormous pressure by the logging company sector-- will consider these positions and incorporate them in its policies to enable them to benefit the local communities and the country as a whole, while ensuring environmental conservation.

By: Ana Filippini, e-mail: anafili@wrm.org.uy

top