***********************************************
WORLDWIDE
FOREST/BIODIVERSITY CAMPAIGN NEWS
The
Ongoing Threat to the World's Forests
***********************************************
Forest
Networking a Project of forests.org
http://forests.org/ -- Forest
Conservation Archives
http://forests.org/web/ -- Discuss Forest
Conservation
9/22/99
OVERVIEW
& COMMENTARY by EE
Hey,
the mainstream media is waking up to the forest crisis! Here is
a good
one from USA Today.
g.b.
*******************************
RELAYED
TEXT STARTS HERE:
Title: The ongoing threat to the world's forests
Source: USA Today (Magazine)
Volume 128, Issue 2652; ISSN:
0161-7389
Status: Copyright UMI Company 1999. Contact source for permission
to reprint
Date: September 1, 1999
Byline: Janet N Abramovitz; Ashley T Mattoon
DURING
THE 1850s, massive white pine trees-more than six feet in
diameter-were
so abundant in North America's Great Lakes region that
tree
cutters considered any log less than three feet wide to be
"undersized."
Today, the trees are harvested at one-third that width.
Despite
predictions by chroniclers of the day that the forests were
too
vast to be depleted, the "limitless" supply of white pines did
indeed
fall, as did the local industries that had been built on these
invaluable
resources.
Such
boom-and-bust patterns began millennia ago in ancient Greece and
Rome.
They continue today as the search for timber pushes into the
world's
last old-growth forest frontiers-from the temperate and
boreal
forests of Canada, Russia, and Chile to the tropical forests
of
Brazil, Indonesia, Papua New Guinea, Cambodia, and Cameroon.
Nearly
half of the forests that once covered the Earth are gone.
Between
1980 and 1995 alone, at least 200,000,000 hectares of forest
(more
than 500,000,000 acres) were lost-an area larger than Mexico.
In
industrial countries, where most of the world's commercial wood is
produced,
timber harvest is the primary cause of forest degradation.
In
developing nations, land clearing for agriculture and grazing
combine
with timber harvesting to reduce forest area.
Driving
the timber harvest is growing demand for wood products. In
the
last three decades alone, use of industrial roundwood (timber
used
without being squared by sawing or hewing) has risen by almost
one-third;
paper consumption has nearly tripled; and fuelwood and
charcoal
consumption have grown by almost two-thirds. As the world's
most
populous nations become more affluent, demand is likely to
continue
spiraling upward.
The
world's forests face other pressures as well-invasion by exotic
species,
air pollution, vast fires, and climate change. The health
and
quality of the remaining forests are declining, lessening their
ability
to support species and ecosystem services.
When
forests disappear, more is lost than just timber. The top 150
nonwood
forest products traded internationally-such as rattan, cork,
nuts,
oils, and medicinals-are worth more than $11,000,000,000 a
year.
They provide even greater local benefits, including employing
hundreds
of millions of people.
In
addition, the forests shelter countless species, including
organisms
that are useful in pollinating crops and controlling
disease-carrying
pests.
Without
forest cover to protect watersheds, rainfall erodes the
denuded
land, while flooding and drought become more extreme. In
1998,
heavy rains brought record-setting floods to many deforested
regions,
including India, Bangladesh, and Mexico. Flooding in China's
Yangtze
watershed-which has lost 85% of its forests to logging and
agriculture-resulted
in thousands of deaths, dislocated hundreds of
millions
of people, inundated tens of millions of hectares of
cropland,
and cost tens of billions of dollars.
The
apparent abundance of wood products in the marketplace may give
consumers
a false sense of complacency about the health of forests.
Yet,
because the production and consumption of major forest products-
timber,
paper, and fuel-are principal forces driving the loss and
degradation,
there is hope that these trends can be reversed by
changing
the way these products are produced and used.
The
landscape of timber production, trade, and consumption has
changed
significantly during the past century. The tools of
harvesting
and processing have evolved from axes and saws to
mechanical
harvesters and highspeed mills. The decreasing supply of
larger
trees and higher-value species has led suppliers to turn to
other
regions, species, and processes to satisfy growing demand. New
ways of
using wood have created a range of products-from paper to
plywood-that
were scarce or unimagined 100 years ago.
While
the wood on the market today derives from a variety of forest
types
and nonforest areas, relatively little comes from sustainably
managed
forests. Although a substantial share of wood still
originates
in primary forests, more now comes from secondary stands
(those
that have been harvested and regrown), mainly in the U.S. and
Europe.
Even though tree plantations are increasing in area,
sometimes
at the expense of natural forests, just 10% of today's
industrial
wood comes from tree farms. In many countries, the most
valuable
primary forests have been exploited, and there is public
sentiment
to reduce logging pressures on what remains.
Worldwide,
about 55% of the wood cut today is used directly for fuel,
while
the rest goes into industrial products such as lumber and
paper. Production of pulp for paper and wood-based
panels like
fiberboard
has expanded far faster in recent decades than traditional
products
like sawn wood, which require the higher-quality wood that
is in
increasingly short supply.
Almost
half of the world's fuelwood is produced in five countries-
India,
China, Brazil, Indonesia, and Nigeria. Five nations produce
more
than 45% of the world's industrial wood harvest. The U.S.,
Canada,
and Russia have remained among the top five producers for at
least
40 years, while China and Brazil joined this group in the
1970s.
Together, the top 10 (which includes Sweden, Finland,
Malaysia,
Germany, and Indonesia) account for more than 71% of
industrial
production.
The
value of the wood trade (legal and illegal) makes this sector a
potent
economic force, one that has long influenced how forests are
managed
and nations interact. More and more wood products enter the
international
market every year, reflecting a general trend toward
trade
globalization.
Very
little of what the United Nations' Food and Agriculture
Organization
(FAO) classifies as fuelwood moves across borders, so
trade
here refers almost exclusively to industrial wood. Worldwide,
the
share of production that is exported has doubled since 1970.
High
cost of overproduction
The
effort to expand production and trade has come at a high cost to
many
nations that are cutting their forests at unsustainable levels.
The
Philippines provides a cautionary example of the consequences of
this.
In the 1960s and 1970s, the Philippines became one of the top
four
timber exporters in the world by liquidating 90% of its forests.
Since
then, the nation has turned into an importer, and 18,000,000
forest
dwellers have become impoverished.
Since
1961, Canada has more than tripled production; Brazil and
Malaysia
expanded output more than fivefold; and Indonesia increased
output
sevenfold. These nations continue to cut their forests at
unsustainable
rates. Not coincidentally, Indonesia, Brazil, and
Malaysia
together accounted for 53% of the world's forest loss during
the
1980s.
A
disproportionate share of the world's industrial wood is grown and
used in
industrial nations. Although developing countries have raised
their
rate and share of consumption in recent decades, these are
still
well below the levels of industrial nations. Indeed,
consumption
per person in industrial nations is 12 times higher than
in
developing ones. Fuelwood is the only wood product that developing
counties
use more of.
The
relative scarcity of large, high-quality timber has caused prices
for
many solidwood goods to rise in some regions in the last 35
years.
Yet, the relentless search by the timber industry for new
sources
of cheap raw material to bring to market has shielded many
consumers
from these price hikes and kept them unaware of the changes
in
quality and species. For consumers without access to products from
distant
markets, however, such scarcities are keenly felt.
Rising
consumption and declining forests, combined with economic and
social
pressures, have spurred improvements in how efficiently wood
is
utilized. Although wood was so abundant in North America through
the
19th century that processors used only the straightest, clearest
portion
of a log and discarded the rest, such gross wastage is
largely
a thing of the past. Between 1945 and 1990, the amount of raw
wood
used to make each ton of industrial wood products fell by 23%.
As a
result, consumption of many finished products (such as paper and
plywood)
has grown faster than the overall wood harvest.
In the
U.S., for example, while population more than tripled since
1900,
the total amount of wood used grew by 63%. The net result is
that
wood use per person actually has declined by 52% since 1900.
Most of
the rise in U.S. wood consumption in this century has
occurred
since 1950, as usage for buildings and paper exploded.
The
rise in efficiency has been made possible in part by improvements
in
forest practices and by new technologies in harvesting,
processing,
and recycling. Many mills are utilizing computer-guided
machines
to maximize the value and amount of usable product from each
log. In
industrial countries, 4050% of the wood that enters a sawmill
ends up
as solid lumber (although in much of the developing world the
figure
is still just 2530%).
Further,
in industrial countries, virtually all of the residues are
used
for other products like pulp, new composite wood products, or
fuel to
run the mills.
As
large trees have become more scarce and technologies have
improved,
new wood products have been developed to meet demand. Many
of
these use smaller-diameter trees, formerly underused species, or
wood
waste that once was destined for the burn pile. Oriented strand
board
(OSB), for example, is made of layers of small wood chips glued
together.
It first appeared in the 1980s and already accounts for
almost
one-third of the growing panel market.
Some newer
products are replacing other wood-based goods-like OSB for
plywoodwhile
others are substituting for nonwood products, as rayon
(a
fabric made from wood pulp) does for silk or cotton. Still other
woodbased
products are being put to entirely new uses, such as
combining
wood fiber and plastic to make stronger automobile door
panels.
Even making paper from trees, which now consumes almost one-
fifth
the total timber harvest, was developed just 150 years ago.
In most
timber-processing operations, short pieces of wood are
considered
waste and are burned to power the plant or ground up for
pulp.
Many processors, though, have found ways to turn this "trash"
into
cash by making higher-value-added products that do not need long
pieces
of wood, such as desk organizers, mouse traps, and sushi
trays.
One of the most valuable uses of these scraps is to "finger-
joint"
short lengths together to create long pieces that can be used
for
doors, windows, and molding. In the U.S., scraps used as boiler
fuel
fetch $14-24 per 1,000,000 board feet; for papermaking, $50-125;
and as
shipping pallets, up to $200. When they are converted to
finger-jointed
moldings, however, they command $1,250-1,350.
Reduction
in the waste and pollution generated by processors is
another
part of the changing timber landscape in the last few
decades,
thanks to technological advances spurred largely by public
concern
and government regulation. Pulp and paper mills in Sweden,
for
instance, have reduced their sulfur emissions by about 90%, and
chlorine
bleaching has been eliminated.
Technology
has negative effects as well. Expensive new machines allow
vast
areas to be quickly cleared, bundled, and chipped in around-the-
clock
operations that employ few workers. Mills are bigger and
faster.
Moreover, as products are turned out more cheaply,
consumption
is encouraged, feeding into the false sense of abundance.
Consumption
increases have been at least tempered by efficiency
improvements
and recycling, helping to stem the demand for virgin
materials.
Worldwide, 41% of all paper and paperboard is recovered
for
recycling. Despite this, further expansion of recycling is
needed.
In the U.S., for instance, the volume of municipal solid
waste
has doubled in the last 30 years; disposal options are closing
down;
and costs are rising.
Since
more than half of the waste (by weight) sent to landfills or
incinerators
still is paper and wood, significant opportunities exist
to
reclaim this lost resource and at the same time reduce the burdens
of
waste disposal and ease pressures on forests.
Greater
processing efficiency and expanded recycling have not been
able to
keep pace with overall growth in consumption-in other words,
wood
use is still rising. Further reductions in consumption are
needed-from
eliminating unnecessary purchases to buying products that
have
less packaging and using more-sustainable building methods.
The
future of forest products
When
the European Forestry Institute examined future prospects for
the
world's wood supply, it asked: Will the world run out of wood?
The
answer was: not likely. Indeed, the more profound and far-
reaching
issues to be faced in coming decades are what kind of
forests
will remain, at what cost, for whose benefit, and will they
be able
to support the diversity of life and provide the other
services
people need?
If
current trends continue, according to the FAO, paper consumption
will
increase by 49% by 2010; fuelwood consumption will rise by 18%;
and
overall wood consumption will grow by 20%. Industrial nations are
expected
to continue their already disproportionately high levels of
consumption
and developing nations to increase their demand. Some
analysts
have predicted that, in some major timber-producing nations
such as
the U.S., growth in consumption may outstrip the production
capacity
of domestic timberlands in the next decade, and they will
begin
cutting down their forests faster than they can be replaced.
What
might happen if the developing world reached the high
consumption
levels of industrial nations? If wood use accelerates to
the
point where everyone consumes as much as the average person in an
industrial
country does today, by 2010 the world would consume more
than
twice as much wood as it does at present. If by 2010 everyone
around
the globe used as much paper as the average American does
today,
total paper consumption would be more than eight times the
current
world total. The planet's forests are unlikely to be able to
withstand
the pressure of such demand and still continue to provide
essential
ecosystem services.
Such
scenarios are not inevitable or even reasonable. It is possible
to
balance people's needs for forest products while sustaining the
forests.
New
techniques in sustainable forest management, as well as a broader
appreciation
of forests' nontimber services, offer promise.
Furthermore,
there are a number of ways to meet future demand without
increasing
harvest levels. Indeed, it may be possible actually to
reduce
harvest levels.
If, for
example, total paper consumption in industrial countries
stayed
at current levels, rather than increasing as predicted, world
paper
consumption in 2010 would rise by 24%, rather than 49%. If
industrial
nations reduced their predicted consumption of industrial
roundwood
by eight percent, this would offset the FAO's projected
rise in
developing nations.
It is
possible to reduce wood use by improving efficiency at every
step of
the production process. In the U.S. and United Kingdom, about
30-50%
of the wood that is cut-during land clearing, the thinning of
commercial
stands, or logging-never even enters the commercial flow.
While
some of it needs to be left in the forest, this "waste" offers
opportunities
for local industries and for reducing the overall
harvest.
In many
developing countries, large efficiency gains are possible.
The
amount of finished product that leaves the mills is a fraction of
what it
is elsewhere, and the residues (sawdust, scraps, etc.)
generally
are underused. In Brazil, for example, two-thirds of the
wood
that is commercially harvested is discarded, and only one-third
ends up
as sawn wood. Improving equipment maintenance and worker
training
could increase processing efficiency by 50%. Combined with
better
forest management practices, Brazil could produce the same
amount
of timber while disturbing one-third as much forestland.
If
developing nations improved their processing efficiency to the
current
level of industrial nations by using the newest technologies,
they
could nearly meet their projected 2010 demands for processed
wood
without raising harvest levels. Increasing preand post-consumer
recovery
and recycling could prove to be a fruitful source of
materials
and could reduce the waste burden. For instance, 10% of the
wood
consumed to build new houses in the U.S. ends up as construction
debris.
Worldwide, more than half of all paper is not recycled.
There
are ecologically friendly materials that could replace wood in
many
applications. There is room to expand the use of agricultural
residues
and other nonwoods as a substitute for or supplement to wood
in
paper, construction materials, and fuel. In the U.S., for example,
350,0000
tons of agricultural residues are available each year, even
after
60% is returned to soils. The demand for wood pulp for paper
could
be cut almost in half if the fiber supply for paper shifted to
30% wood
pulp (from 56% today), 50% recovered paper, and 20% nonwood
fibers.
There
clearly are many opportunities to bring about a new forest
economy,
but many of these steps have yet to be scaled up to the
necessary
level. Most individuals and institutions
do not recognize
the
excessive use of wood as a problem. One of the primary obstacles
is
inertia. The status quo is comfortable and familiar; institutions
are
heavily invested in existing technologies and practices; and
governments
are wedded to current policies.
Another
barrier is the reluctance of most industrial nations to even
contemplate
a fundamental question: How much do they really need?
Everyone
can help
High-consuming
nations have a special role to play in reducing the
pressure
they are putting on the world's forests. Not only do their
purchases
and habits directly affect forests, but their technologies
and
lifestyles are often exported (either directly or through the
media)
and adopted by developing countries So far, European nations
have
been leaders in environmental certification of forest products,
reducing
demand, and increasing recycling-all while maintaining a
high
standard of living.
Individual
consumers can make a difference. Their lifestyle
decisions-from
the type and size of home they live in to its
contents,
their recycling habits, and the laws they support-are all
part of
the forest economy.
In the
office, where the speed and ease of computers, printers, and
copiers
have dramatically increased paper use (and the money spent on
paper
and mail), there are opportunities for reduction. Electronic
mail
and computers have the potential to reduce paper use in
communications
and save money. One major insurance company saves 14
tons of
paper yearly by publishing its manuals online. In the U.S.,
the
Environmental Protection Agency cut its paper consumption by 16%
in just
two years by utilizing doublesided copying and increasing the
use of
computers for communication.
Companies
that buy forest products from builders to publishers to
manufacturers-can
shift the forest economy in a more sustainable
direction. Their decisions send signals to suppliers
and regulators.
Commitment
by some large consumers, like newspapers and magazines,
has
begun to have such an effect in Germany and the United Kingdom.
BBC
magazines, for one, which prints 15 trillion pages a year, has
stated
that it would buy paper certified from sustainable forestry
when it
becomes available in sufficient quantity.
Builders
and architects can specify reclaimed or certified wood, set
goals
and targets for purchases and waste recovery, and use efficient
and
durable designs. They can work to make building regulations
responsive
to the principles of sustainable development. Those who
commission
buildings can ask builders to follow these practices.
Microsoft,
for instance, directed that construction waste at its new
office
complex be recycled. In doing so, the company recycled 78% of
the
waste and saved almost $168,000. Although the savings are small
for
such a large company, it demonstrates to others that such an
approach
is practical and profitable. Perhaps the biggest obstacle to
overcome
is the reluctance of builders and construction workers to
adopt
new techniques.
In the
pulp and paper industry, major impediments to change are the
capital-intensive
nature of the industry and scant research on
alternative
fibers. Thus, the industry is inflexible to changes in
market
conditions or fiber sources. Agricultural residues are an
underused
fiber source that could make a substantial contribution to
the
feedstock for paper in some areas.
Job
creation often is used as the rationale for increasing harvest
levels
and government subsidies to the forest industry. Ironically,
in
recent decades, there has been a general decline in the number of
jobs
generated in extractive forestry, despite record harvests. In
Sweden,
about half of all jobs in the forest products industry have
been
lost since 1980, a time when output grew by more than 17%,
largely
as a result of increased mechanization. In Canada, the
world's
biggest timber exporter, the number of jobs per volume
harvested
has fallen by 20% in the last 20 years, despite a
substantial
rise in harvest levels. There have been job declines in
other
sectors that relied on forests that were no longer healthy-
fisheries,
for instance.
Further,
many of these extractive industries generate relatively
little
employment, especially when compared with other options for
forest
use. The U.S. National Forests currently are managed primarily
for
timber supply, despite the fact that recreational use of these
woodlands
generates nearly 2,600,000 jobs and adds $97,800,000,000 to
the
economy. Logging, on the other hand, adds 76,000 jobs and
$3,500,000,000.
The
most important reform governments can make is to end long-
standing
policies of encouraging and subsidizing high-volume
extractive
industries under the assumption that this use of the
forests
is the most profitable. Subsidies have
helped create
unrealistically
low prices that do not reflect the true value of
forest
resources and the costs of squandering them.
Timber subsidies
make it
difficult for other materials (such as recycled or nonwood
fiber
for paper) to compete fairly and drive down prices that private
landowners
can get for their timber. Overcoming this barrier is
essential
to creating a sustainable forest economy-and putting a
nation's
economy on a sounder footing. *
Janet
N. Abramovitz is a senior researcher, Worldwatch Institute,
Washington,
D.C. Ashley T. Mattoon is a staff researcher with the
organization.
###RELAYED
TEXT ENDS###
This
document is a PHOTOCOPY for educational, personal and non-
commercial
use only. Recipients should seek
permission from the
source
for reprinting. All efforts are made to
provide accurate,
timely
pieces; though ultimate responsibility for verifying all
information
rests with the reader. Check out our
Gaia's Forest
Conservation
Archives & Portal at URL= http://forests.org/
Networked
by forests.org, gbarry@forests.org