Trees, Energy and Loans
by Ranil Senanayake^*

We are in the low rainfall month of April, but the heat and sense of dryness is very intense. There is a cut in electricity because of the lack of water in the hydroelectric reservoirs. There is a decrease in the availability of potable water. These are facts that we see about us. They are not comfortable and they need to be addressed. However they are indicators of a change to the very nature of this nation brought about by, greed, ignorance and jealousy. There are rains in the hills. But none of the falling water makes it to the streams. The once perennial streams that filled the reservoirs are no longer perennials; they run dry this month. The rains of this month are sporadic and scattered. The hills are scorched and dry. Most of the rainfall is evaporated by the heat of the soil. Before, the forests would catch the rain and put it away from the suns heat in the forest soil. The high humus forest soils would absorb the water like a sponge. If a second fall came the sponge would fill to saturation and release water into the streams. In between, evapotranspiration creates the clouds that condense into local rainfall. On the hill slopes the effect of old growth montane forests to condense fog, creats groundwater recharge even when there is no active rainfall. This is why forests are so important on catchments, it is also a reason why it is very dangerous to rely on deforested catchements for hydroelectric water as in the case of the proposed upper Kotmale plan. The hope that such projects will help ease the power shortfalls from the hydroelectric grid during periods of low rainfall is smplistic and can have very high opportunity costs.

In the hubris of the possibility of foreign funded projects, commissions and  self-interest, much seems to be forgotten of our forefathers. The Rt. Hon. D.S.Senanayake commenting on the matter of water says: 

" In this connection it is of importance to remember the part played in the conservation of water by the forests of the country. With the evidence daily accumulating of the wisdom of our forefathers, we need scarcely doubt that it was not merely the idea of making the mountain country difficult of approach by the foreign invader that caused them to preserve unfilled and uncleared the dense vegetation of their mountain slopes. We may readily believe that they deliberately left these untouched in order to provide that abundant supply of water on which they might draw for the benefit of man.

The claim is sometimes advanced that "the Sinhalese villagers of the uplands of Ceylon did not lose anything by the conversion of vast areas of untrodden forest into thriving estates", but on the other hand received "some not inconsiderable benefits". On the debit side of the account, however, must be placed the not inconsiderable damage done to the cultivation of the villager's food crops by floods which this clearance of the forests has entailed."

He was one of the first to point out the impeding disaster by not properly appreciating a forest and the nature of Sri Lanka. In this Book 'Agriculture and Patriotism' He quotes two experts of his time on the subject : 

Strange, in 1909 observed: "It would not have been necessary to notice here the matter of soil denudation, did it not affect irrigation and water supply. The result of stripping the soil is to make the springs on tea states dry up quickly; to diminish the fair-weather flow of streams and to increase their storm flow (whereby temporary irrigation weirs are carried away) and to choke with silt the beds of the streams and the irrigation channels led from them. It is also said to reduce the fertilizing property of the water, as there is now less leaf mould in solution. Even paddy fields have been ruined by sandy deposits laid on them. When tanks lie in the course of streams thus affected, the rate of their silting-up will rapidly increase and their storage capacity will greatly diminish. Even the large rivers, such as the Kelani, have had their section diminished by soil debris, so that for this reason, as well as on account of the greater run-off produced by the clearance of the forest entailed by the establishment of estate plantations, the flood waters cannot be contained in the river channel, but are spread over the riparian land and do much damage. If such damage affected only a small area it would not, of course, matter much, but it has to be remembered that the tea and rubber estates are on the hills, and uplands, which are the principal sources of supply to rivers draining two-thirds of the Island; the effect of denudation it thus widespread."

P.M. Lushington wrote in 1921: "Forests do not increase the rainfall to any appreciable extent, but they serve to distribute the water supply and to prevent erosion and thus to secure to any country a supply of clear water, and prevent the fertile soil from being carried to the sea. By cooling the atmosphere forests assist in causing additional local rainfall, and this may sometimes be of value, but their value, in breaking the force of the wind, in preventing floods and land-slides, and the silting up of greater condemnation of the Forest Policy of Ceylon can be made than that which Nature herself affords in the drought, such as that experienced in February and March last, the rivers ran mud and not water. The reason for this is not difficult to discover. It has been hitherto been customary to think that the old order if the Secretary of State for the colonies (1873) prohibiting the clearing of forest land above 5,000 has done a great deal in this direction, and there is a little doubt that this order, coupled with the advice given by Sir. J. Hooker in the same year concerning the formation of a large climatic reserve ought to have drawn attention to this most important side of the question. At the present time there is much discussion concerning the so called climatic reserve of Kalutara, but the whole point of protective forests have been missed. Take the motor map of Ceylon and it will be found that the only river whose main source comes from an elevation of over 5,000 feet is the Mahweli Ganga. The main catchments of this river are not included " He pointed out that while it was admirable to protect the forests over 5000 ft. Such a law only protected the watershed of the Mahaweli. It still left the watersheds of all the other rivers still unprotected.

The forests of the watersheds of the rest of the rivers of the land were vested mostly with the Forest Department. In this upcoming centenary of the Forest Department it may be wise to look with modern eyes. If the FD was a private institution and was given the capital it received over the last 100 years to protect our forests, what would the condition of our national forest estate rate? Institution would probably be put into liquidation. This is not to say that the Forest Department was always ineffective, the early history of the department produced amazing work. The mixed plantations that were established early in the last century, the research on the growth and propagation of Sri Lankan trees, the work on minor forest products made this nation a leader in forestry knowledge. Somewhere in the mid century the rot began to set in. Forestry became a design of foreign consultants and was dictated by multilateral needs. The department regressed into an implementation arm of foreign funds. As the trends intensified in the 1970 - 80s, it is interesting to reflect on statements on the performance of the Bretton Woods institutions:'

" The debt of the non-oil producing Third World increased five-fold between 1973 and 1982, reaching a staggering $612 billion, and the High interest rates of the mid-1980s further exacerbated the problem. Much of this loan money was squandered on ill-considered projects or simply siphoned off by Third World élites into personal accounts in the same Northern banks that had made the original loans." 

The final humiliation for Sri Lanka was when the recent 'Master Plan' for Forestry claimed that Forests represent 'unprocessed wood'. Although consequent revisions in the face of public outcry removed this odious reference. The philosophy of 'biomass maximization' remained the guiding values that has framed the 'Master Plan for Forestry'. Was the surrendering of indigenous approaches to forestry and the experience gained in the early days of the forest department abandoned because our researches made comparative studies for the best and finally chose the Pinus and Eucaypltus monocultures or was it because there was money attached to it? Here we must also look at the legal or other obligations by consultants to whom they give advice and get large payments from. Are they liable if they give bad advice and the nation winds up millions of dollars in debt as a consequence? Experts are brought in at every conceivable juncture to provide the right information. If they provide bad or unworkable information, will they be liable in Sri Lankan law ?

The Sunday Island of March 31st. Was very interesting in showcasing this debate. On page 9 Mr. Ashley De Vos writes questioning the effectivity of the ADB approaches to address our biodiversity problems and on page 14 Mr. Nigel Billimoria writes in defense of the ABD. Mr. Billmoria asks a pertinient question 'Where should the money for conservation come from ?' The answer is contained in Mr. De Vos who states that as we do not pay the real value of environmental services this money really comes from us. If the ABD accepted the real value of environmental services, then the loan would begin to pay dividends. This carries a very powerful lesson for evaluating the effectively of a government in its foreign dealings. Projects that attract grants should be valued higher than those serviced by loans. Projects that are serviced by loans must have real vale cost/benefit evaluation. Getting into unserviceable debt is bad for household, business or nation. 

One of the reasons for the current debacle may stem from the fact that the 'Forestry' establishment still does not understand a forest. A forest, as all modern research is demonstrating, is an ecosystem where trees account for just 1% of the total biodiversity. Yet all forestry action in this nation is still focussed on cutting or growing trees. While the forestry institutions happily accepts all the money and responsibility of attending to our national obligations under the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) the recognition of a forest as being comprised of other things than trees is still long in coming.

The international response to the loss of natural forest ecosystems is similar and can be seen in the massive global investment in forestry. However, a great majority of these revegetation programs around the world do not provide an environment that is hospitable for sustaining local biodiversity. A situation brought about by neglecting the potentials of local knowledge and local species. This neglect ensured that institutional forestry activity was centered on the growing of even aged monocultures of fast growing trees only.

This raises some interesting questions, what is a forest? what should be its social and ecological attributes? It seems that the word forest means different things to different people. Early in recorded history, Gautama Buddha (250 BC) provided an intriguing meaning when he observed that " A forest is the most benevolent of all beings, giving generously of all its life processes. It even affords shade to the axeman who would fell it". This reference to a forest as an entity reflects the current view of a forest a complex integrated system or the view of the global, environment as an organized, self-regulating system. Very different to today's economic models, where it is seen only as a source of revenue. In an economic sense forests are collections of trees of varying timber value. This narrow perception has allowed application of monoculture, even aged plantations to meet with most global forestry needs.

The fact that over 99% of a forest biodiversity resides in its non-tree component confirms our traditional views of a forest. We would therefore recommend that the Conference of Parties develop mandates in agricultural and forest biodiversity similar to the Jakarta Mandate on marine coastal biodiversity.

Further given the history and experience of the impact of financial flows on biological and cultural biodiversity it would seem that the subject of financial flows and impact require close attention by the Convention on Biological Diversity.

We in Sri Lanka are just coming to grips with the complexity and magnitude of the problems in addressing biodiversity loss. Therefore, it is useful to develop a set of performance indicators of success or failure which will allow us to understand and appreciate what has been achieved and help to guide the directions we are to take." 

Forests are essential to the sustainability of biodiversity, water quality, water quantity and environmental stability. The present direction in 'Forestry' expenditures leave much to be desired. Taking loans based on a poor understanding of a forest and of our history can only lead to disaster! Taking loans to pay salaries and maintain existing institutional infrastructure is fine, but it should not be disguised as nationally important activity. Finally, we should heed the words of D.S.Senanayake and not drown any more valleys for reservoirs until the catchments have first been repaired.
 

* Published in 'The Island' National Newspaper 23.03.2002