Latin American Forests the Time is Ripe for Change
11/1/98
*******************************
RELAYED TEXT STARTS HERE:
Title: Latin American Forests the Time is Ripe for Change
Source: World Rainforest Movement
Status: Distribute freely with proper credit to source
Date: 11/1/98
WORLD RAINFOREST MOVEMENT
MOVIMIENTO MUNDIAL POR LOS BOSQUES
International Secretariat Oxford Office Instituto del
Tercer Mundo 1c Fosseway Business Centre Jackson 1136
Stratford Road Montevideo Moreton-in-Marsh
Uruguay GL56 9NQ United Kingdom Ph +598 2 409
61 92 Ph. +44.1608.652.893 Fax +598 2 401 92 22
Fax +44.1608.652.878 EMail: rcarrere@chasque.apc.org EMail:
wrm@gn.apc.org Web page: http://www.wrm.org.uy
**********************
=================================
W R M B U L L E T I N # 17
NOVEMBER 1998
=================================
In this issue:
* OUR VIEWPOINT
- Latin America's forests: the time is ripe for change
* LOCAL STRUGGLES AND NEWS
LATIN AMERICA
- Argentina: investors' paradise for forestry projects - The two faces of
the Brazilian policy on forests.
- Venezuela: forests menaced . . . plantations promoted.
- Ecuador: the Cofan's successful action against an oil well - Indigenous
peoples fight for territorial rights in Guyana - Nicaragua: hurricane
Mitch devastation linked to deforestation - Colombia: the murder of three
environmentalists
AFRICA
- In defense of Central African forests
ASIA
- Indonesia: APRIL the troublemaker
- Indonesia: violent confrontations related to Indorayon - Northern
Thailand: a bridging meeting in London
EUROPE
- European NGOs and foreign aid
INTERNATIONAL
- Climate Change Convention: much ado about nothing - Contribution to the
debate on carbon sinks - NGO Forest Working Group: Every Tree a Good Tree?
*WRM GENERAL ACTIVITIES
- News from the International Secretariat
OUR VIEWPOINT
- Latin America's forests: the time is ripe for change
The Climate Change Convention meeting held in Argentina is a good
opportunity to highlight the issue of forests and tree plantations in
Latin America. We have therefore focused this issue of the Bulletin on a
number of representative examples of the problems and struggles which are
currently occuring in the region.
Government double-speak is exemplified -though by no means monopolized- by
Brazil. While championing forest protection in global fora, its policies
and actions continue resulting in further forest loss.
Government-sponsored migration to the forest, conversion of forest lands
to agriculture and cattle raising, forest fires, dam building and illegal
logging continue unabated, while its global international discourse
clearly pertains to the area of virtual reality, with little in common
with what is actually happening at the ground level.
Large-scale tree plantations -one of the cherished solution of global
technocrats to climate change- are increasingly being opposed by local
people affected by their social and environmental impacts, as well as by
most environmental NGOs. Struggles against them are mushrooming from
Mexico to Argentina, but governments seem to be deaf and blind to peoples'
opposition to such forestry model. We are improving the environment! they
say. We are planting forests and countering the greenhouse effect! they
add. Impacts on people, on water, on soils, on biodiversity are quickly
dismissed as scientifically unproven facts. Supported by multilateral
development institutions, bilateral aid agencies, northern consultancies
and machinery providers, Latin American governments increasingly subsidize
transnational wood-based companies with both Northern and Southern
taxpayer money to increase the area of fast-growing tree monocultures. In
most cases, such policy results in the substitution of forest ecosystems
by plantations (therefore becoming a direct cause of deforestation), while
in some few countries (particularly those located in temperate areas such
as Uruguay and certain regions of Argentina), plantations substitute
grassland, thereby implying the total destruction of the native prairie
ecosystem.
Government-sponsored "development" projects continue resulting in further
deforestation and forest degradation and in most cases the only visible
change has been the inclusion of the word "sustainable" to the same type
of projects which have proven to be detrimental to forests in the past.
Guyana's and Suriname's forests, for instance -some of the more well
preserved forests in the region- are being destroyed by foreign mining and
logging companies through concessions awarded by government, without the
approval and with the opposition of indigenous peoples and other local
communities who struggle to preserve the forest.
Mangroves throughout the region continue to be destroyed -with government
support- by shrimp farming, with the aim of increasing exports to obtain
foreign currency to pay back loans from international credit institutions.
Local peoples, whose livelihoods depend to a large extent on products
obtained from the mangroves, are deprived access to them and only receive
back a completely degraded ecosystem once the shrimp farms are abandoned.
Oil and increasingly gas exploitation are being promoted throughout the
region, both by governments and multilateral institutions, with the
resulting destruction of forests, (including water and air pollution and
biodiversity loss) and peoples' livelihoods. Local communities are
opposing such activity and a number of struggles are under way to halt it.
Among them, we wish to highlight the successful struggle of the Cofan
indigenous peoples in Ecuador (see article in this issue), who have
recently closed down an oil well in their territory.
Deforestation is further increasing the consequences of natural disasters.
The tragedy which recently happened in Honduras and Nicaragua during the
occurrence of hurricane Mitch could have been much lesser if forests areas
had not been cleared. Mudslides and deadly floods were the result of years
of deforestation. Clearance of forest land in the region is always a
direct or indirect result of government policies and not -as they try to
portray- the result of ignorance and poverty. Unfair land-tenure policies,
the promotion of logging and of the substitution of forests by other "more
productive", export-oriented activities, as well as many other policies
leading to deforestation, are all the result of government-led
"development".
Road-building, now acklowledged as one of the major underlying causes of
deforestation, continues being promoted both by governments and
multilateral agencies. In Ecuador, a large tract of primary forest
belonging to the Chachi indigenous peoples will be soon affected by a new
road linking the area to southern Colombia and to other Ecuadorian
provinces.
Even in cases where governments seem to have finally decided to protect
the forest by creating reserves, they break their own rules whenever their
economic policy decides that the economy comes before conservation. Such a
case is highlighted by the struggle of local communities in Venezuela,
fighting to protect the Imataca forest reserve, which the government is
destroying to export electricity to Brazil and to produce cheap energy for
mining companies which will further destroy the forest.
Indigenous peoples are struggling throughout the region to achieve the
official recognition of their territories, which constitutes a basic step
to ensure forest conservation. Such struggle has achieved some important
successes in specific cases, but almost always against a background of
lack of political will from the government and the frequently violent
opposition of local or transnational economic interests.
In general terms, the protection of local communities' human rights and
the conservation of forests and other ecosystems are dangerous activities
in the region. The long list of people murdered increases every year and
we sadly inform in this bulletin about the most recent deaths in Colombia.
Within such context, there are however positive signs. Both at country and
international level, more and more people are becoming aware about the
vital need to protect the forests and are taking action to support the
rights of forest peoples and forest-dependent peoples as a means to ensure
such aim. At the local level, more communities are standing up to defend
their rights and their forests. Even though governments' discourse is
clearly divorced from their actions, the adoption of such a discourse is a
clear sign that the time is ripe for change.
LOCAL STRUGGLES AND NEWS
LATIN AMERICA
- Argentina: investors' paradise for forestry projects
After the attempt of the Argentinian authorities during the recent COP4 on
Climate Change in Buenos Aires to gain the favour of Annex I countries
putting forward the polemic issue of voluntary reductions of greenhouse
gases by developing countries, the Argentinian government continues its
efforts to pave the way for the entry of the country into the globalized
economy. Last September the Lower House passed a forestry promotion bill
that offers tax breaks and subsidies for foreign investors interested in
establishing tree plantations in that country. The government hopes that
an average of 200,000 hectares a year will be planted between the year
2000 and 2009. Tree plantations averaged 23,000 hectares during the year
1992 but the annual plantation rate reached 126,000 hectares in 1998 as a
result of promotional policies by some provincial governments.
Spokespersons of the Secretary of Agriculture, stated that the guarantees
offered to private investors in the forestry sector can be considered a
model for the whole of Latin America, and expressed that as a result of
this law a large influx of foreign investment is expected. To their eyes,
Argentina is an investors' paradise for forestry projects, since growth
rates in several species -as yellow pines and eucalyptus- is very high and
land prices are even cheaper than in Brazil.
However, it is not hard to realize that there is actually nothing new in
the Argentinian Forestry Law. It is the same scheme repeated in the
neighbour countries Chile, Uruguay and Paraguay: neoliberal oriented
economies, that deny resources for social security and education or to
promote other productive sectors, but devote large sums of money not only
for directly supporting private investors in the forestry sector, but also
for creating the required infraestructure such as roads, ports, etc.
Obviously a very good deal for investors. A number of foreign companies
have quickly perceived this. The Chilean firms Arauco and Compania
Manufacturera de Papeles y Cartones (CMPP) are keen to occupy vast
grassland areas with tree monocultures. While giant Arauco already owns
the second largest plantation in the country, CMPP is expanding its
plantations to feed a large pulp mill to be installed in in the near
future. Other newcomers include New Zealand's Fletcher Challenge, US'
Inland Container and Germany's Danzer. In a workshop held in Rosario this
November, organized by the forestry industry, Mr Erik Kivimaki, Ambassador
of Finland to Argentina, promoted the import of Finnish machinery and
know-how for promoting the development of the forestry sector in
Argentina. Finland is a strong stakeholder in the sector worldwide and its
forestry model for export has been severely criticised by environmental
organizations in the host countries and in Finland itself.
Of course the Anglo-Dutch oil company Shell -that also owns big eucalyputs
plantations in Uruguay, Chile, Brazil and Paraguay- could not be absent in
this process. Shell's move looks still more worrying for the environment,
since the company aims to obtain environmental credits on greenhouse gas
emissions -under the Clean Development Mechanisms established by the Kyoto
Protocol- for the 24,200 hectares of plantations it has installed in
Buenos Aires Province. Another plantation project with ponderosa and
oregon pine in Chubut Province, in the Patagonia region, is also seeking
to obtain carbon credits. Such project, in charge of CIEFAP and supported
by the German Agency GTZ, already occupies 55,000 hectares and 10,000
additional hectares are to be planted by the end of this year. According
to its promoters, exotic trees would act as pioneer species in this
southern savanna ecosystem, to be later replaced by native species, but
such reasoning does not seem to make much sense.
Having faced severe criticism over the development of monoculture tree
plantations in tropical areas --that imply the destruction of natural
forests-- now foresters and governmental agencies are seeing with good
eyes projects related to LUCF (Land use Change and Forestry) in temperate
regions, under the Clean Development Mechanisms. They are claiming that
tree plantations in grasslands would contribute to recover degraded soils,
as well as to counteract the greenhouse effect, which are seemingly good
arguments to obtain public support. However a capital issue is being put
to side: grasslands are not only the natural and physical basis for
production in those regions, but also the major source of biodiversity in
their ecosystems. Large scale plantations are definitively not a positive
factor to this regard. Therefore promotion of large-scale tree monocrops
in Argentina must be seen as a different type of environmental destruction
under the guise of a "green" activity.
Sources: Financial Times, 24/9/98; La Capital, 5/11/98; Buenos Ayres Issue
# 6 9/11/98.
- The two faces of the Brazilian policy on forests.
At the COP4 of the Climate Change Convention held in Buenos Aires, Brazil,
together with China and India, led the position of developing countries
demanding the acknowledgement of historical responsibilities by countries
in relation to climate change. The Brazilian delegation also underscored
the need for the protection of the Amazon forest. However, domestic forest
policy does not seem to go in the same direction.
During a recent workshop on the environmental impact of large-scale
development projects in the Amazon and Mato Grosso regions, organized by
CIMI (Conselho Indigenista Misionario), information was revealed that the
Ministry of Mining and Energy will build 400 new hydroelectric dams by the
year 2015. Many of them will flood large areas of forest lands belonging
to indigenous communities.
Additionally, the degradation and destruction of vast areas of the Amazon
forest by fires has continued throughout 1998. Both degradation and
elimination of forests will contribute to accelerate global warming.
Research carried out by the Instituto de Pesquisa Ambiental da Amazonia -
an NGO based in Belem, in northern Brazil- and the Woods Hole Research
Center, based in Massachusetts, had predicted that approximately 400,000
square kilometres of the Brazilian Amazon would become vulnerable to fire
during the 1998 dry season. The unusually low amounts of rainfall in 1998
have increased the area of fire-vulnerable forest to more than one million
square kilometres, or one third of the Amazonian forest. However, the
degradation of forests burnt and left standing is not included in the
government's monitoring program, that only considers total burning and
clearcutting as deforestation and therefore official figures hide
significant amounts of carbon released through partial burning of forests.
In relation to climate change, these results are important for the
estimation of carbon emissions from Amazonian forests associated with land
use practices: the partial burning of standing forest can release 10 to
80% of forest biomass to the atmosphere as carbon dioxide. Such large
amounts of carbon dioxide are not included in current estimates of carbon
emissions from Amazonia. On the other hand, according to a computer model
programme run by Centre Hadley for Climate Change and presented at the
COP4, if the destruction of the Amazon forest continues at the present
rate, vast areas of tropical forests are menaced of becoming deserts by
the year 2050. This would mean -among many other things- the loss of the
largest carbon reservoir in the world.
Forest fires are enhanced by the selective removal of trees, which allows
the sun's rays to reach the forest soil and to create a dry and prone to
fire environment. The Brazilian Institute for the Environment (IBAMA)
recently revealed that logging companies have illegally extracted US$ 70
million worth of mahogany from the Kaiapo indigenous peoples' territory in
southern Para province and it has also accused 16 local sawmills of theft
and falsification of documentation. IBAMA has been carrying out a number
of actions to curb illegal logging in the Amazon, which will probably be
discontinued as a result of a 47.4% cut in the budget of the Ministry of
the Environment. The Amazonian Working Group (Grupo de Trabalho
Amazonico), composed by 355 Brazilian NGOs, has recently denounced a 90%
reduction in the resources devoted to projects to be implemented in the
Amazon and Mata Atlantica regions, and sent messages to the Parliament
trying to stop the budget reductions proposed by the Federal Government.
The Brazilian government's international discourse on the importance of
the Amazon forest in relation with climate change therefore seems to have
little in common with what is actually happening in the real forest.
Sources: "Estudo preve desertificacao na Amazonia", Estado de Sao Paulo,
4/11/98; "Aquecimento global debe criar desertos na Amazonia", Jornal da
Tarde, 4/11/98; Woods Hole Research Center , "Flames in the Amazon forest:
carbon emissions go up", E. Melloni & A. Galvao, "Ibama prepara reduØcao
dos custos fixos", Estado de Sao Paulo, 5/11/98; Information Bulletin for
the Buenos Aires Conference, 11/11/98; CIMI, 16/11/98 and 23/11/98;
Resenha Ambiental Ecopress, 24/11/98.
*************
- Venezuela: forests menaced...plantations promoted.
In WRM Bulletin nr 14 (August 1998) we informed about the blockade of the
highway Venezuela-Brazil by a group of indigenous peoples of the Imataca
and Gran Sabana regions to stop a high voltage electrical transmission
line (Macagua II-Santa Elena de Uairen), that is being built through the
Imataca Forest Reserve. This is a particularly rich in biodiversity and
vulnerable area, menaced by mining projects promoted by the controversial
Decree 1850, which was highly resisted by indigenous communities,
environmental NGOs and academics (see WRM Bulletin nr 12).
In spite of their efforts to have their rights over their ancestral
territories recognized by the subsequent governments, the indigenous
communities of this country have always been ignored and deceived and
their wish that Venezuelan society becomes a multicultural and multiethnic
one, is still far from being achieved. According to local organizations,
Venezuelan legislation is even less progressive than that of other Latin
American countries to this regard.
A group of representatives of the indigenous comunities of Imataca, Gran
Sabana and Paragua sent a letter dated October 3rd to the Brazilian
Ambassador in Caracas, denouncing to the Brazilian people and authorities
the terms of the Guzmania Protocol -signed by Brazil and Venezuela in
1994- that promotes mining, tourism and forestry in Imataca and Gran
Sabana, ignoring the ancestral rights of indigenous peoples over these
lands and inducing negative environmental consequences. They expressed
that the Guzmania Protocol violates Article 77 of the Venezuelan
Constitution, where an exception regime for indigenous peoples is
recognized to guarantee their territorial rights.
Continuing their actions, on October 22nd a group of indigenous leaders,
representatives of several indigenous peoples of Imataca and Gran Sabana
regions, addressed the Supreme Court of Justice, demanding the total
suspension of the construction of the transmission line, since it will
negatively affect the environment, their livelihoods and culture. They
claim that while the Universal Declaration of Human Rights -whose 50th
anniversary is celebrated in 1998- establishes that every people has the
right to create and enjoy its own culture, and that the Venezuelan
Constitution guarantees an exception regime for indigenous peoples
territories, they are actually plunged into material and spiritual
poverty. Land tenure is at the centre of the problem. Indigenous peoples'
ancestral territorial rights and their communal property regime are not
recognized. Meanwhile their territories are sold out to transnational
companies, squandering the national heritage. There are many examples of
this depredation, besides that of Imataca: the indigenous territories of
the Amacuro Delta, Monagas and Anzoategui have been occupied by oil
companies, and the Bari and Yukpa of Zulia Estate are facing coal
exploitation in their traditional lands.
Unwilling to protect the forests and the people that make a sustainable
use of them, the Venezuelan State is actively promoting tree plantations
under the usual scheme. The so-called National Programme for the
Development of Forest Resources establishes a zonification for plantations
in soils considered marginal for other activities. Putting to side the
issue of the adequacy or not of such zonification (zones considered as
marginal by the state are usually considered very useful by local people),
the fact is that there are cases where the law has been ignored and tree
plantations have been established in lands considered apt for agriculture
and cattle raising. A paradigmatic example is that of the transnational
company Smurfit -established in 27 countries all over four continents-
which has occupied fertile peasants' lands in Portuguesa State with pine,
eucalyptus and gmelina monocultures, forcing their displacement.
Unfortunately, the Venezuelan case is not an exception in Latin America:
repression to those who protect the forests and benefits to those who
destroy them.
Sources: Alfredo Torres (pers.comm.); AMIGRANSA, 7/11/98; "Contra los
pinos, eucaliptos y melinas de Smurfit", Ecologia Politica, 14, 1997
*************
- Ecuador: the Cofan's successful action against an oil well
While government officials were politely exchanging speeches in Buenos
Aires at the 4th Conference of the Parties of the Climate Change
Convention, -all of them refering to the need of conserving the world's
forests as a way of mitigating the impacts of climate change- a group of
indigenous people, in a much less comfortable situation, were doing in
Ecuador something far more concrete to this end.
Last October a group of Cofan indigenous peoples occupied and closed the
Dureno 1 oil well, near Lago Agrio city in the northeastearn region of
Ecuador, as an action of protest against the activities of the oil
industry in their ancestral territories. The well -located only 20 metres
away from the water sources of the Cofan community- had been polluting
this precious resource and depleting the flora and fauna of the area. "We
have lived in this ancestral territory, as guardians of this forest, for
centuries, as its sons and only owners. We have offered land, food,
materials, work, for what they call 'development' and during this process
we are just getting poorer and poorer and even risking our possibilities
of surviving as a people" stated a spokesperson of the Cofan. The
occupation, initiated on October 12th (anniversary of the date when the
continent's indigenous peoples suffered the Spanish invasion) ended on the
22nd, after having achieved their purposes.
Initially, the Ecuadorean government had reacted by sending soldiers to
the conflict area, trying to frighten the Cofans, stating that it would
not negotiate "under pressure". However, the government finally agreed to
carry out a number of important actions such as:
1) The removal of the storage tanks and gas flares and the closure of the
waste pool
2) The establishment of a commission with similar number of government and
Cofan's advisors, to take a decision on the closure of the oil well, which
will take into account economic, environmental and engineering matters 3)
The legalization of the Cofan's territory, most of which lies within the
protected area system
4) The creation of a team -including NGO representatives- to verify
pollution and the necessity for a clean-up operation in the rivers that
cross their territory
5) The acceptance of the need to financially compensate the Cofan for the
damages suffered due to oil exploitation. The Cofan decided that the
compensation money will be dedicated to the purchase of land, where forest
will be allowed to regrow.
In sum, the action carried out by the Cofan people has had very positive
results and they now have a unique opportunity to reverse the damage
inflicted to people and the environment by the oil industry.
Source: Oilwatch, Accion Ecologica, Ecuador, November 1998
*************
- Indigenous peoples fight for territorial rights in Guyana
The opening of Guyana to foreign companies from the mid-1980s has caused
destruction in the country's tropical forests -a rare case of virtually
untouched ecosystems until then- and the complete disregard of the
Amerindians that have lived in these forests for centuries using their
resources in a sustainable way. This process continues to the detriment of
Guyana's forests and indigenous peoples, who are carrying out actions to
revert such situation.
On November 2 the government of Guyana and Vancouver-based mining company,
Vannessa Ventures Ltd., signed an agreement granting Vannessa more than
two million hectares of land in which to conduct geophysical and
geological surveys for gold and primary diamond sources over the next two
years. This concession includes the heavily forested Kanuku mountain
range, through to the upper reaches of the Corentyne River on the border
with Suriname in the eastern region of Guyana. The area is part of the
ancestral territory of the Wai Wai, Wapisiana and Macusi indigenous
peoples. They have vigorously objected to any mining or logging company
operating on their lands and are demanding that their rights to their
ancestral lands be legally recognised and respected. It is also the
location of a proposed National Park as part of a National Protected Areas
System project to be implemented in the country.
Guyanese Prime Minister pointed out that, even if the Geology and Mines
Commission has legal authority to permit exploration for or exploitation
of any minerals -including those found under Indigenous lands- the
government has adopted a policy according to which the permission of the
affected communities is to be previously obtained. Such a position may
sound positive and progressive concerning the rights of Indigenous
peoples, but several aspects are raising concern.
Given that this policy is not instituted in law there is no legal support
to suppose that it is not going to be ignored by the Geology and Mines
Commission as has happened in the past. On the other hand, Amerindian
titled lands are only a small part of the lands over which indigenous
peoples of Guyana have asserted ownership rights. To date, indigenous
villages have received title to just one-quarter of the area recommended
by the Lands Commission -established in 1967 in accordance with a legal
condition for the independence of the country- and approximately one-
seventh of that identified by Amerindians themselves as theirs.
The failure of the government to address indigenous land rights is also
causing problems in connection with the establishment of a protected areas
system. Several communities -as those of the Patamona and the Rupununi-
have rejected National Parks on their lands until their land rights have
been fully recognised by the national authorities.
The full recognition of the Amerindian land rights in Guyana is a
necessary measure to stop the detrimental activites of the multinational
(mostly Canadian) mining companies and Asian logging companies that
operate in the country. The case of Vanessa is just an example of this
state of things. Indigenous peoples of Guyana have been very active in
this regards. For example, in October 1997, all of the community leaders
of the Wai Wai, Wapisiana and Macusi peoples formed the Touchau's
Amerindian Council of Region 9 to defend their ancestral territories from
miners and loggers. Last month six Akawaio and Pemon Indigenous leaders,
from the Upper Mazaruni, filed the first ever land rights law suit in the
High Court of Guyana. "Our communities have been requesting title to these
lands, which we know to be ours, since the Amerindian Lands Commission
visited our communities in 1967. Since then we have attempted to discuss
this matter on many occasions without result" states the written statement
presented in Court. Time for patience seems to be over. Now it's time for
action.
Sources: Guyana Information Update, Forest Peoples Programme, 5/11/98 and
13/11/98.
*************
- Nicaragua: hurricane Mitch devastation linked to deforestation
High rates of deforestation contributed to the flash floods and mudslides
which caused most casualties due to Hurricane Mitch, Central America's
deadliest disaster. More than ten thousand perished, and thousands more
are still missing in Nicaragua and Honduras.
According to Father Miguel d'Escoto, a member of the FSLN National
Directorate, "This is the worst natural disaster in our [Nicaragua]
history; even more so than the earthquake [in 1972]."
In Nicaragua every year, 150,000 hectares [approximately 375,000 acres] of
forested land are destroyed by commercial timber cutting, the advancing
agricultural frontier, slash and burn farming and forest fires. The
country has lost nearly 60% of its forest cover in the last 50 years.
According to Jaime Incer, former Nicaraguan Minister of Natural Resources,
deforestation has dried up 200 rivers and contributed to the erosion of 3
million tons of topsoil. Without tree roots to hold soil in place, heavy
rains on barren hillsides cause the highly unstable soil to slide, taking
with it everything and anything in its path.
Since the devastation has been linked to widespread deforestation, the
Nicaragua Network Environmental Task Force is calling for an end to
multinational logging ventures in the Atlantic Region of Nicaragua. The
Atlantic Region has the largest intact segment of moist forest remaining
in Central America. The region hosts many rare and unknown ecosystems
(coastal wetland, mangrove, mid-altitude humid forests and bamboo forests
and others), as well as numerous endangered species.
"In the wake of this hurricane, with all of the information coming out
about the links of deforestation to the wholesale destruction we have seen
in Nicaragua and Honduras, anything short of a total ban on commercial
logging by multinationals in Nicaragua would be criminal," stated Mary
Brook of the Nica Net ETF.
In addition, nationwide reforestation projects must be initiated. But
above all, unconditional cancellation of the IMF and World Bank debts of
the affected countries is imperative to allow them to focus their
financial resources on their long-term recovery efforts.
Source: ACERCA, Action for Community & Ecology in the Rainforests of
Central America. Email: acerca@sover.net,
http://www.nativeforest.org/campaigns/acerca/index.html
*************
- Colombia: the murder of three environmentalists
Gloria Sofia Zapata, Hernando Duque and Eder Alexander Valencia were
murdered on October 14, October 20 and November 9. They were members of
the environmental organization "Hojas de Hierba" (Herb Leaves) of the
municipality of Belen de Umbria in the province of Risaralda. Hector Ivan
Escobar and John Jairo Lopez, of the same organization, have had to leave
the country.
According to information from the region, the assasination seems to be
linked to a local struggle to protect the Umbria valley as an
archeological and touristic site against a landfill project in the area.
The three activists had also organized events with the community and
municipal authorities to halt the spread of large-scale eucalyptus and
pine monocultures in the region. As a result of those activities they had
received threats and requested protection from the govenment, which was
denied under grounds of lack of resources to protect NGOs.
Local NGOs are now demanding the regional Ombudsman to conduct an enquiry
into these murders and express their concern over the lack of response
from municipal and environmental state bodies. At the same time, they are
organizing a meeting with environmental, community, peasant and indigenous
peoples' organizations to analize the situation created in the region,
which will take place on November 28th.
Source: CENSAT-Agua Viva. E-Mail: censat@colnodo.apc.org
*************
AFRICA
- In defence of Central African forests
By means of a letter dated October 22 a group of environmental NGOs
addressed Mr Henri Djombo, Minister of Forest Economy of the Republic of
Congo, to express their disapproval regarding a number of actions carried
out by him, believed to be aimed at undermining the Brazzaville Process.
As informed in WRM Bulletin nr 11 the Brazzaville process is trying to
build a concertation framework open to all actors participating in the
sub-region's forest sector, aiming at the sustainable management of forest
ecosystems in Central Africa. The second meeting of the Conference on
Central African Moist-Forest Ecosystems (CEFDHAC) took place in Bata,
Equatorial Guinea from 8 to 10 June 1998.
"The forests of Central Africa may suffer a similar fate of those in the
West African region unless a process promoting transparency, broad
consultation and coordination involving all stakeholders, especially those
at the community level, can take root" expressed the signatary NGOs, in
support of the Brazzaville process.
*************
ASIA
- Indonesia: APRIL the troublemaker
Finnish and Indonesian NGOs have repeatedly denounced that UPM-Kymmene's
partner -the Singapore-based APRIL (Asia Pacific Resources International
Holdings Ltd.)- is violating human rights and causing severe environmental
problems in Indonesia. The company has converted rainforests to exotic
monoculture plantations, to feed their pulp mills and NGOs demand that the
project is abandoned (see WRM Bulletins nr. 6 and 8).
Four representatives of the human rights group of the Finnish Parliament
recently visited APRIL's pulp mill in Riau Province to check the situation
in situ. Even if all of the parliamentarians were at the same place, not
all of them were able to see the same things . . . While the
representatives of the Greens and the left wing parties concluded that the
logging of thick rainforest looked ruthless, the deputy of the
Conservatives considered that population pressure is the cause for forest
destruction and that acacia plantations in Indonesia are similar to
Finnish fields in their homogeneity.
UPM-Kymmene stated that the methods used by APRIL are the best option for
supplying the mill. UPM also reminded that last Spring APRIL committed
itself to a wide environmental programme.
APRIL is still in financial trouble and hasn't been able to find finance
for the second paper machine in Riau. Before that machine is ready, its
full alliance with UPM will not take place. Even if Finnish export credit
has in some way already granted some US$500 million loan for APRIL, the
loan has not been awarded yet, probably due to conditions in Indonesian
markets.
The above is not the only conflict created by APRIL in Indonesia. The
holding owns 61.3% of the shares of Inti Indorayon Utama, a pulp mill in
North Sumatra Province. Indorayon produces up to 240,000 tons of pulp and
60,000 tons of viscose fiber for the production of paper and rayon by
APRIL. The company was hurt by the 1997 economic crisis and decided to
close down the mill, which would mean the loss of their jobs for about
7,000 workers, who thereby oppose the closure. At the same time, villagers
of Porsea demand that the factory remains closed, since the company's
activities had been causing acid rain, damaging water supplies and
fisheries, and plundering natural forests. Residents of Porsea continue to
live under military intimidation. Environmental groups and university
student organizations support this struggle and state that the eucalyptus
trees in Indorayon's reforestation programme are draining water reserves.
On the opposite side, APRIL's shareholders in New York have recently
addressed president Habibie warning about the "negative effects" of the
closure on the confidence of foreign investors in Indonesia. The conflict
has even resulted in direct confrontations between workers and villagers.
On November 22nd, villagers burned logging trunks and workers'
accomodations in Porsea.
The case of APRIL can be considered an example of how workers and
villagers are held hostage by a situation created by the economic interest
of investors and central government decisions. Given that neither local
people nor the environment were taken into account when the mill and the
plantations were set up in the area, this has resulted in environmental
degradation and social conflict, where workers tring to protect their jobs
confront villagers trying to protect their livelihoods. Comfortably seated
in Jakharta or New York, APRIL's shareholders use the dire needs of the
workers to serve their purposes.
Sources: Otto Miettinen, Friends of the Earth/Finland, Forest Group,
8/11/98 (based on Minna Asikainen, "MPs disagree about environmental
impacts of April. Finnish MPs visited mill of UPM's partner", Helsingin
Sanomat, 5/11/98); Tom Bannikoff, "A company copes in post-Suharto
Indonesia", Asiaweek, 8/11/98, Liz Chidley, 23/11/98 (based on SiaR
WEBSITE: http://apchr.murdoch.edu.au/minihub/siarlist/maillist.html)
*************
- Indonesia: violent confrontations related to Indorayon
A policeman was rushed to hospital in Medan with a serious head injury
after being beaten up in a confrontation on Monday 23rd November between
security forces and local people at Porsea, North Tapanuli, North Sumatra.
Another police officer suffered wounds to the back and leg. A police
patrol vehicle and a government official's car were destroyed by the crowd
and three other cars plus 23 homes and shops were smashed up and burnt.
A spokesperson for local NGO KSPPM said four local men had leg injuries
from rubber bullets. The violence erupted after another Porsea man was
shot on Sunday. Thousands of local people took to the streets and burnt 15
Indorayon logging trucks. A number of houses, shops and other vehicles
were also damaged or burnt. The crowd were prevented from approaching the
Indorayon paper and rayon pulp factory at the Sosor Ladang site (on the
outskirts of Porsea) by security forces that night. But they succeeded the
following day when the crowd had swelled to around 5,000 and that is when
the four were shot. The crowd dispersed due to the violence of the
security forces.
This incident is part of a long running dispute between the local
community and the Indorayon pulp mill. Local people have protested
repeatedly to local and central government since 1989 that the factory
should be closed due the adverse effects of the pollution and
deforestation it causes. Indorayon workers recently held a five-day
counter demonstration in Medan to keep the mill open in order to safeguard
their jobs. The government ordered an independent audit to settle the
dispute. As part of that process, the factory has been allowed to resume
operations after a three-month shut-down and this -and the high level of
security forces- is what has angered local people.
Former assistant to the Environment Minister and Bandung law professor,
Daud Silalahi, accused PT IIU of serious violations of air and water
pollution laws since the early 1990s. He said that attempts to prosecute
the company by successive environment ministers had failed due to
manipulation at local and central government levels.
Source: Kompas 24/11/98 (Summary/translation by Down to Earth)
*************
- Northern Thailand: a bridging meeting in London
In June 1998 we published a special WRM bulletin focused on the
environmental and social problems affecting the lives of highland people
in Northern Thailand, including a critical response regarding a previous
article published in WRM bulletin 11. We are pleased to inform that a
number of people, both from within and outside Thailand, got together on
October 2nd in London, with the aim of clarifying the differences in
analysis and approach of the wide number of actors involved directly or
indirectly with this very complex situation. The meeting, designated as "A
Consultation on Conservation and Conflict among Tribal Peoples, Lowlanders
and the State in Northern Thailand" also discussed a number of possible
ways forward.
'The meeting heard the views of NGOs, conservationists, Karen and Hmong
leaders and a number of Thai and British academics. The debates
highlighted a number of different aspects of the dispute, including the
scientific uncertainties regarding the environmental impact of highlander
economies and the degree to which perceived reductions in water flow and
rising siltation in the lowlands are the result of upland agriculture or
other factors such as intensified land use in the lowlands. The
highlanders emphasised the way they are modifying their own land use
practices to moderate their impact on upland forests. All parties to the
meeting agreed that forced relocation of highlanders was unacceptable but
there remained disagreement as to whether relocation was necessary and
what 'voluntary resetttlement' might mean. Above all the meeting made
clear the need for clearer information and improved dialogue between all
parties, although the present polarised nature of the dispute is making
this increasingly difficult.
Notes of the meeting are available upon request from the Forest Peoples
Programme (wrm@gn.apc.org) or from the International Alliance of
Indigenous and Tribal Peoples of the Tropical Forests (morbeb@gn.apc.org)
*************
EUROPE
- European NGOs and foreign aid
A group of 22 organizations sent a letter dated 10 November 1998 to the
German Development Minister, Ms. Heidemarie Wieczorek-Zeul, in order to
express their concern over the environmental and social impacts of the
European Commission's development aid programme and demanding clear
actions from the forthcoming German Presidency of the European Union.
The group quotes as an example of the mismanagement of the Community's aid
programme the case of road-building programmes in Cameroon, that has
negatively affected the Dja World Heritage Site, one of Africa's most
important rainforest conservation areas. Among other points, the NGOs
highlight the need to include high environmental and social standards in
the EU development assistance programme, and the full consultation and
participation of stakeholders -especially local communities- throughout
the whole period of each project.
Source: The Rainforest Foundation, 16/11/98.
INTERNATIONAL
*************
- Climate Change Convention: much ado about nothing
Nothing much seems to have happened during the 4th Conference of the
Parties held in Buenos (COP4) Aires from 2 to 13 November. From a broad
perspective, this can be regarded as very bad news, given that climate
change is happening and will increasingly affect the lives of millions of
people. From a more concrete perspective, the same news can be seen as
positive, given that the majority of governments don't seen to be willing
to make the difficult decisions that need to be made: subsitution of
fossil fuels by renewable, clean and low impact energy sources and
worldwide forest conservation. As the whole discusion on how to address
climate change is focused on negotiations to avoid major cuts in fossil
fuel use and to avoid real measures to halt deforestation, the seemingly
bad news coming from Buenos Aires can be considered -in such a context- as
good news.
Regarding forests and tree plantations as carbon reservoirs and sinks,
decisions on the definitions of deforestation, reforestation and
afforestation as per Article 3.3 of the Kyoto Protocol will be taken by
the first COP following release of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change (IPCC) of a Special Report on Land-Use Change and Forestry (which
will take place at COP6). Additionally, it was agreed that decisions on
the inclusion of any additional human-induced land-use and forestry
activities eligible for consideration by Parties under the Kyoto Protocol
(Article 3.4) will also be decided at the first COP following release of
the IPCC-Special Report (additional activities could include forestry,
forest conservation, soil conservation, other agricultural activities,
etc.).
There was pressure from some countries, including Australia and some EU
countries to accelerate decisions on definitions under article 3.3 to be
made prior to the IPCC Special Report. In the end, these pressures for
early decisions were held back, which can be considered a good thing given
the important consequences that such definitions may result in. Canada -
for instance- has taken the position that clearcutting of forests,
including old-growth forests, should not count as a carbon "debit" since
they do not consider that as "deforestation", but that replanting
clearcuts should count as a carbon "credit" under reforestation. Absurd
as this may seem -it would be like a bank account where none of your
checks are debited, and all your deposits are credited- Canada's position
is indicative of the wide range of problems that will emerge if
definitions on deforestation, reforestation and afforestation are adopted
without careful analysis of their consequences.
The Buenos Aires meeting also witnessed marked differences in NGO opinion
regarding sinks. Some US based NGOs (namely the Environmental Defense
Fund, The Nature Conservancy and the World Resources Institute) promoted
very wide expanded use of sinks. The World Rainforest Movement, Friends
of the Earth, JATAN, WWF, Greenpeace and many other NGOs took the opposite
view, stating that not only will wide use of sinks undermine achievement
of the objectives of the Convention -which is to stabilize greenhouse
gases at levels below which irreversible impacts to ecosystems, including
forest ecosystems, will occur- but that additionally, activities promoted
under it will more likely lead to overall negative impacts on forest
biodiversity and local communities. Concerns included perverse incentives
to log and clear primary forests, accelerated expansion of fast-growing
monoculture tree plantations and impacts resulting from those processes on
local communities and indigenous peoples.
In sum, neither governments nor NGOs are particularly united at the
climate change level and many issues still remain open for discussion.
Such situation provides a breathing space for all those concerned with
people and the environment, to raise awareness among the public about the
role that their governments are playing in these negotiations, so as to
influence them in a more positive direction than the one they seem to be
heading to. As part of these activities, we include below a contribution
received from Rainforest Relief and a summary of the NGO Forest Working
Group's press release at COP4.
*************
- Contribution to the debate on carbon sinks
One point that is not being sufficiently taken into consideration in the
debate about plantations as carbon sinks is the production end of the
issue. That is, most of these monocultural non-native species plantations
are being grown for either of two products: paper or fiberboard. In both
cases, the trees will be turned into chips and then made into something
else.
How much of the actual wood fiber grown on the plantation is sequestered?
Very little, especially in the case of paper.
Let's see: the trees grow, sucking up a certain amount of carbon as wood
fiber mass. Much of the soil around the trees is compacted in the logging
process. This does two things: drives out much of the carbon in the
organic layer, and makes the soil more prone to erosion, which further
frees up the carbon it holds.
Much of the carbon, of course, is turned into leaves which eventually fall
to the ground as the tree grows. These leaves rot into the soil, becoming
part of that organic layer mentioned above.
The trees are cut and chipped, eventually being turned into pulp and then
into paper or cardboard. These products are then used and most often
thrown away. In the case of corrugated cardboard, very few countries have
achieved recycling rates over 50%. Most of the corrugated in the world is
used once and then landfilled.
Even in the US, a country with a relatively high recycling rate (as
compared with the rest of the world, not with other industrial countries,
that is), only about 14% of white office paper is recycled. Much of the
plantations in Brazil and Indonesia, two of the world's leading pulp and
paper producers, is going into office paper.
So, this paper --where one would argue that most of the carbon taken up by
the plantation has been sequestered-- is pretty much landfilled. Here, the
bulk of it will, over time, decompose in an anearobic environment -that
is, without the presence of oxygen- and be released into the landfill (and
eventually the atmosphere) as methane. Methane is 25 times more effective
as a global warming gas than is carbon.
Therefore, most of the sequestered carbon will be ultimately released as
methane or simply re-released as carbon in the process of harvest,
chipping, pulping, waste, production into paper, and finally,
decomposition.
A small portion (that going into fiberboard) will become non-durable wood
products which will also soon be landfilled. That is, even fiberboard is
disposable over a relatively short period of time (at least in America,
where this type of furniture lasts only a few years). And when it is
buried in the landfill at the end of its short life, it too, will generate
methane.
A tiny fraction of the wood fiber produced by the plantation will be
sequestered over the long term as durable wood products, far exceeded,
however, by the methane generated by the disposal of all the paper and
fiberboard thrown out by an ever-expanding overconsumptive global economic
machine.
The science behind carbon sequestration in plantations is not science at
all, but is instead smoke and mirrors used to generate more plantations,
benefitting large paper, pulp and wood products companies, at the expense
of the Earth and local people.
Carbon sink plantation promoters seem to have forgotten that in order to
actually sequester the carbon, the trees must either:
- be left to grow; or
- be turned into durable products that will hold that carbon for hundreds
of years; and
- never be allowed to decompose in an anaerobic environment.
None of this is happening in any substantial way when it comes to fast-
growing non-native plantations.
Source: Tim Keating, Rainforest Relief
************************************************************ - NGO Forest
Working Group: Every Tree a Good Tree?
Press release. Buenos Aires, 9 November 1998. NGO Forest Working Group
expresses strong concern about inclusion of forests in the Clean
Development mechanism.
The NGO Forest Working Group, an informal coalition of NGOs, which has
been following intergovernmental negotiations relating to forests since
1995, has expressed strong concerns about the potential inclusion of
forestry and land use change in the Clean Development Mechanism
established by the Kyoto Protocol. One of their main concerns is that this
inclusion will lead to a strong increase in large-scale monoculture tree
plantation development in developing countries: Large-scale plantation
development is increasingly becoming one of the most important causes of
the destruction of native forests and other natural ecosystems. These
plantations tend to have very negative social and environmental
consequences for local communities, as they deprive them from their land
and livelihood.
For the complete version of this press release, please request it from us
at :
WRM GENERAL ACTIVITIES
*************
- News from the International Secretariat
Ricardo Carrere participated in the Africa Workshop of the Joint
Initiative to Address the Underlying Causes of Deforestation and Forest
Degradation held in Accra, Ghana, from 26 to 30 October. The case studies
presented at the workshop will be shortly available in our web site, where
we have already included some of the studies presented in other regional
processes, such as Latin America, North America and Western Europe.
He also took part in the meeting of the Global Secretariat of the above
initiative with the regional focal points, held in Buenos Aires (6-11
November), parallel to the Climate Change Convention's COP4. The aim of
the meeting was to make the final preparations of the Global Workshop
which will be held in Costa Rica next January 18-22. The International
Coordinator of the WRM also participated as panelist in a conference
organized by Sobrevivencia (Paraguay) on November 6 at the Centro Cultural
Recoleta, Buenos Aires, on the issue of the impacts of large-scale tree
plantations.
Alvaro Gonz lez, member of the International Secretariat of the WRM,
attended the XI Global Biodiversity Forum held in Buenos Aires, from 6 to
8 November, organized by IUCN. The aim of the meeting was to strengthen
the links between climate change and biodiversity issues. At the "Climate
Change, Forests and Biodiversity" workshop, several presentations were
made and an interesting discussion took place on CDM and LUCF, including
the controversial issues of measurements of carbon storage and plantations
as carbon sinks.
Ricardo Carrere and Alvaro Gonz lez were also present during part of COP4.
The WRM Statement to COP4 (see WRM Bulletin nr 16) was distributed among
observers and participants of the event.