Title:   WRM BULLETIN 40, NOVEMBER 2000

Source:  WORLD RAINFOREST MOVEMENT

  MOVIMIENTO MUNDIAL POR LOS BOSQUES

  International Secretariat              

  Maldonado 1858, CP 11200     

  Montevideo                                      

  Uruguay

  Ph +598 2 403 2989                      

  Fax +598 2 408 0762                    

  E-mail: wrm@wrm.org.uy                            

  Web page: http://www.wrm.org.uy         

Date:  November 27, 2000  

 

In this issue:

 

* OUR VIEWPOINT

 

- Those who did not "work it out" in The Hague

 

* LOCAL STRUGGLES AND NEWS

 

AFRICA

 

- Gabon: The new Forestry Law and transnational companies

- Kenya: Local peoples' land rights ignored

- Nigeria: Shell's choice between profits and principles

- Tanzania: Impasse on commercial shrimp farming at Rufiji Delta

mangroves

 

ASIA

 

- India: Mining and plantations put National Park at risk

- Laos: Subsidies for Swedish profits in the forestry sector

- Malaysia: Campaign against plantation and pulp mill project in

Sabah

- Malaysia: Where is Bruno Manser?

- Thailand: A diversity-based community forest management system

 

CENTRAL AMERICA

 

- Guatemala: Community forest concession initiative at Peten

questioned

 

SOUTH AMERICA

 

- Argentina: A shady carbon sink project

- Brazil: Aracruz caught red handed destroying native forests

- Chile: Wine production threatened by pulp mill project  

- Weyerhaeuser's president promotes plantations in Guyana

 

OCEANIA

 

- Australia: Woodchipping old growth forests for "renewable energy"

- Aotearoa/New Zealand: Logging company's dirty tricks revealed

 

* GENERAL

 

- Concerns over the revision of the World Bank's Indigenous Peoples

policy

- Films on forests and plantations receive award

 

***********************************************************

* OUR VIEWPOINT

************************************************************

 

- Those who did not "work it out" in The Hague

 

The Sixth Conference of the Parties of the Convention on Climate

Change is finally over and nothing much appears to have been achieved

to address global warming. This doesn't come as a surprise, given

that the majority of government delegates -- with a few exceptions --

focused more on how to obtain profits for their countries and

corporations from the new carbon trade than on finding true solutions

to the looming climate disaster.

 

In fact, the conference was more like a weekend bazar than a United

Nations meeting. A new generation of carbon brokers was out in force,

adding their voices to more traditional "business NGOs" composed of

oil corporations and other major polluters of the atmosphere. The

nuclear energy lobby was also prominent in the event, trying to sell

its "clean energy" as a solution to climate change.

 

Unfortunately, other, more respected actors, including environmental

non-governmental organizations, were also laying out their wares in

this marketplace, trying to sell forests and plantations as "emission

cuts" or "carbon sink mechanisms". This generated some divisions

among NGOs and Indigenous Peoples' Organizations, which weakened the

position of those truly interested in addressing climate change.

Southern governments, too, were divided on various issues,

particularly the so-called Clean Development Mechanism.

 

The atmosphere was much more humane outside the conference centre. A

demonstration organized by Friends of the Earth, for example, was a

huge success. People from all over the world joined forces to pile up

sandbags to form an enormous dyke in front of the conference centre.

Although the dyke was originally conceived as a symbol of the rising

waters which will come with global warming, it could also be

perceived as a dyke to protect the world from the decisions -- of the

lack thereof -- being taken inside the building.

 

And that was precisely the main problem: the lack of political will

to begin to do what everyone knows needs to be done. Or rather, too

much political will from the large corporations which dominate

politics in the US, Canada, Australia, Japan and other industrialized

countries, together with their armies of technocrats and tame civil

servants. Thus French President Chirac's statement criticizing the

trend of the negotiations was a welcome surprise. Among other things,

he stated that since 1992, Parties had fallen too far behind in

taking actions to combat climate change, and cautioned against

further delays. Furthermore, he highlighted that the US

produces a quarter of the world's emissions, and that the per capita

US levels of emissions are three times higher than those of France.

He called on the US to join other industrialized nations in making a

successful transition to an energy-efficient economy. He said the EU

had a duty to set an example by developing more economical forms of

consumption and production in terms of natural resources.

 

The US delegates were obviously not at all happy to hear this. Nor

did they like Chirac's support for an effective, equitable agreement

that leaves room for future development, an independent and impartial

compliance mechanism, effective cuts by Northern countries in their

emissions, and assistance for the most vulnerable countries to adapt

to the consequences of climate change. Noting that each country has a

duty to build structures that cut its own emissions to a minimum on a

sustainable basis, Chirac emphasized that setting up projects to

reduce emissions in other countries should not be seen as a means to

escape domestic measures. He called for a prudent approach to using

carbon sinks to alleviate climate change, and said that the ultimate

aim should be the convergence of per capita emissions.

 

Chirac's speech, however, was but a short parenthesis punctuating

closed-door dealings aimed at undermining everything he called for.

Emission cuts were never truly on the table. Neither was energy

efficiency or renewables. Even less so equity and justice. Corporate

lobbyists did their job well and visions of short-term financial

gains for a few elites clouded the brains of many Southern delegates,

whose countries and peoples will suffer most from climate change.

Obtaining a few dollars from prominent polluters for forest and

plantation projects was the aim of many -- never mind whether such

schemes were effective or not in slowing global warming. The US and

Japan, meanwhile, got their money's worth from these offers of bribes

in the form of support for some of their positions.

 

"Work it out!" was the official slogan of The Hague Conference. A

simple but meaningful slogan for anyone willing to understand and do

something -- but apparently meaningless to most of the government

delegates present at The Hague. Future generations confronted with

climate change will remember them as those who did NOT work it out.

 

(*) Quotations from Jacques Chirac's statement downloaded from the

Earth Negotiations Bulletin

 

************************************************************

* LOCAL STRUGGLES AND NEWS

************************************************************

 

AFRICA

 

- Gabon: The new Forestry Law and transnational companies

 

The draft Forestry Law being discussed by the Gabonese Parliament

encourages the industrialization of wood within the country.

According to the Ministry for Waters and Forests, the new law will

establish more strict rules concerning the exploitation of the

country's forests. Concessions to private companies will be granted

for a longer period of time, allegedly to favour the regeneration of

the forest. The government elected in December 1998 argues that its

policy tries to conciliate the interests of different agents

involved, with the aim of protecting the forests, and at the same

time diversifying its products. The Gabonese forestry sector has

until now strongly relied on the export of a single product: okoume

roundwood.

 

Even though this initiative, which tends to the diversification of

the country's economy, can be considered positive from a

macroeconomic point of view, capital questions remain unsolved. One

of them is that of public control over the use of natural resources.

In Gabon, as well as in other African countries, due to institutional

structural constraints protection norms are poorly implemented and

enforced. Does the new legislation create financial mechanisms to

ensure that the companies' operations are effectively controlled on

the ground?

 

The second relevant point is that of the so-called "stakeholders".

While transnational logging companies, responsible for the

destruction of tropical forests in the country, remain the most

important actors, forest dwelling peoples continue to be ignored.

Alternatives such as community forest management and locally-based

processing facilities are not taken into account. Additionally, the

new law appears to benefit specially --if not solely-- large logging

companies. In fact Societe Forestiere des Bois Tranches, Leroy Gabon,

Thanry, Groupe Rougier, Societe de Grumes de la Ngounie and other

important companies will be granted concessions for even longer

periods, and will almost certainly be the ones industrializing

roundwood, thus reaping the benefits of added value to the product.

 

In the context of an economy heavily dependent on the exploitation of

natural resources, massive foreign debt, and weak organization of

rural communities and civil society, the colonial vision prevails of

the forest as a mere source of wood managed and exploited by foreign

private companies. The new Forestry Law does not seem to help to

revert this situation.

 

Article based on information from: "Vers l'adoption d'une nouvelle

loi forestiere", Panafrican News Agency, November 3, 2000; "Slave and

Enclave. The Political Ecology of Equatorial Africa", Marcus

Colchester, WRM, 1994.

************************************************************

 

- Kenya: Local peoples' land rights ignored

 

Even though indigenous peoples and rural communities are the ones

directly bearing the brunt of the destruction of rainforests by

intruders, most national governments portray them as squatters and

responsible for the destruction of the forest and the extinction of

wildlife, and threaten them with eviction or undertake direct actions

to expel them from their homeland. This kind of abuse is often linked

to forest concessions awarded to logging companies --which

constitutes an absurd paradox if the aim of the authorities were to

protect the forest-- or the declared intention of protecting

endangered species, considering that nature conservation is only

possible in the absence of human beings. Both types of abuses are

happening in Kenya and the following are two such examples.

 

The Ogiek --a hunter-gatherer and harvester of honey people, dwelling

since time immemorial in the Mau Forest and adjacent areas-- have

once again been menaced by the authorities in order to force them to

abandon their ancestral lands. In 1991 the state partially recognized

their territorial rights to a portion of the Tinet forests, but this

did not result in an improvement in their situation. Nowadays the

Ogiek --numbering some 5000 people-- have been pushed into the last

Forest Belt of the former Mighty Mau and Mt. Elgon Forests. This is

the consequence of a process started in colonial times and continued

after the country's independence until the present time.

 

The successive governments have systematically ignored the Ogiek's

ancestral land rights, and allocated large areas of former forest

lands to the ruling elites. Additionally, part of the remaining

forest has been granted to logging companies, which would lead to

their quick destruction. Even though Kenya ratified several

international treaties related to the protection of the rights of

indigenous peoples --like the International Covenant on Economic,

Social and Cultural Rights and the International Covenant on Civil

and Political Rights-- they have not been respected when concrete

policies are formulated and implemented.

 

A second example of abuse over land rights is related to

conservation. A plan to be implemented by the Kenya Wildlife Service

in the Tana River District in Coast Province --with financial support

from the Global Environmental Facility (GEF)-- to protect the red-

capped manabey, an endangered monkey species, is being resisted by

residents of Ngao and Ndera locations. The official promise to

compensate land owners has divided the local residents into two

groups: one of them accepts to move from their farms along the river,

while the other vows to stay, arguing that money cannot compensate

for the loss of their land and the dramatic change in their

lifestyle. In fact people are proposed to move to the semi-arid

plains of Ozi and Kipini where there are no rivers.

 

Molu Shambaro, a local leader and member of Parliament for the

district, who is opposed to the eviction, has expressed that local

dwellers' rights have to be respected, and has proposed that the

wildlife service involves local people in their campaign to conserve

the Tana River mangabey instead of forcing them to leave their lands.

Shambaro asserted that if local people get involved, wildlife

conservation and traditional lifestyle in the area will become

compatible. He also accused both the government body and its GEF

counterpart of corruption, which is considered to be the main reason

for the failure of conservation projects in the country.

 

Article based on information from: International Network of Forests

and Communities, 27/10/2000, e-mail:

network@forestsandcommunities.org ;

http://www.forestsandcommunities.org ; Thousands Face Eviction to

Conserve Kenya's Tana River Mangabey, by Naftali Mungai,

http://ens-news.com/ens/oct2000/2000L-10-20-01.html

************************************************************

 

- Nigeria: Shell's choice between profits and principles

 

Shell is continuing its clever misleading propaganda orchestrated

through advertisements circulating in the most influencial press

media of the North, in order to revamp its tarnished image and

convince public opinion that it is an environmentally friendly

company. The campaign "Profits and Principles: Is there a choice?" is

based on beautiful photographs of wild animals, lush forests, and

tender faces of African people accompanied by texts like: "Time and

again at Shell we're discovering the rewards of respecting the

environment when doing business". "If we're exploring for oil and gas

reserves in environmental sensitive regions, we consult widely with

the different local and global interest groups to ensure than

biodiversity in each location is preserved." "At Shell we are

committed to support fundamental human rights. We invest in the

communities around us to create new opportunities and growths."

 

Nevertheless in the Niger Delta reality could not be more far away

from the self image the company is making efforts to show. Since

1958, when Shell arrived to the region a nightmare began for the

Ogoni, an indigenous nation of about 500,000 people living in the

area. Counting on the support of successive governments Shell took

hold of Ogoniland. As in other parts of the world where oil is

exploited, the result has been high unemployment and poverty rates,

environmental devastation and loss of livelihoods for the local

people. Repression has been brutal. About 80,000 people had their

villages destroyed and about 2,000 were killed by the state armed

corps. Last November 10th marked the 5th anniversary of the murder of

the environmental leaders Ken Saro Wiwa, Barinem Kiobel,  John

Kpuinen, Saturday Dorbee,  Paul Levura, Nordu Eawo,  Felix Nuate, 

Daniel Gboko and Baribor Bera. Their "crime" was to fight for the

rights of their people against abuses commited by Shell and the

Nigerian military government that was backing it.

 

In 1993 the Ogoni declared Shell "persona non grata" and got it out

of their lands. But after an absence of seven years the company is

menacing to return to Ogoniland. In April this year the announcement

was made that the only aim of Shell was to remove its remaining

facilities, which were causing environmental problems in the area due

to the emission of poisonous gases and uncontrolled leaking.

Nonetheless in October Shell admitted that its real intentions were

to reactivate its 125 oil wells in the region. If this happens

violence, collusion and misery will increase. It is clear that Shell

has got an answer to the question of whether there is a choice

between profits and principles. The answer is yes and the choice is

profits.

 

Article based on information from:  "Some things never change" by

Andy Rowell and Owens Wiwa, The Guardian, 8/11/2000; "Greenwash

Award: Shell. Clouding the Issue" by Kenny Bruno, 15/11/2000

( http://www.corpwatch.org/greenwash/shell.html ); MOSOP Ogoni,

17/11/2000, e-mail: mosopgb@hotmail.com

 

(The full text of the memorial message from Ms. Gbenewa Phido,

President of MOSOP-UK on 11/11/2000 to mark the 5th memorial

anniversary of the murder of Ken Saro Wiwa and other Ogoni leaders,

has been included in our web site under: Information by

country/Nigeria. Previous articles published in our Bulletin about

the struggle of the peoples of the Niger Delta are available in the

same site)

************************************************************

 

- Tanzania: Impasse on commercial shrimp farming at Rufiji Delta

mangroves

 

The Rufiji Delta in South Eastern Tanzania holds some 53,255 hectares

of unspoiled mangrove forest. These mangroves are not only a key

element for the environment in the region by stabilising the

coastline, building land through accumulation of silt and the

production of detritus, preserving the quality of water, and serving

as windbreaks for the hinterland, but also constitutes the source of

livelihoods for thousands of people living there (see WRM Bulletin

12).

 

In April 1999, Tanzanian NGOs were able to secure an interim order

staying plans of the African Fishing Company's 10,000 hectare shrimp

farm project at Rufiji Delta. Would the project have been

implemented, one third of the whole Rufiji Delta would have ended up

in the hands of the company for a period of no less than ten years,

thus threatening the livelihoods of thousands of local farmers and

fisherfolk living in the delta, and causing severe environmental

impacts that would have put at risk the future of the region.

 

The panel of three judges chosen to hear and dictate on the case

disintegrated when one of its members retired and another one was

transferred. The case has not yet been assigned to another panel and

it appears that at present there are not enough judges to constitute

a new one. In the meantime, the company is said to be facing severe

financial constraints which would have even forced it to sell part of

its assets. Although the situation is not yet clear, it seems that

the efforts carried out by concerned citizens and organizations have

managed to save --at least for the time being-- the mangroves and

local peoples' livelihoods.

 

Article based on information from: Late Friday News, 71st Edition,

October 2000; e-mail: mangroveap@olympus.net

************************************************************

 

ASIA

 

- India: Mining and plantations put National Park at risk

 

The temporary work permit given to the Kudremukh Iron Ore Company

(KIOCL) to continue the extraction of iron in the Kudremukh National

Park, located in the Western Ghats region of the state of Karnataka,

has given place to severe criticism from national and international

environmental NGOs, which had been putting pressure on the

authorities for the company's request to be denied.

 

KIOCL has been operating in the Aroli and Malleshwara regions of

Kudremukh National Park, under a 30-year lease, which expired in July

1999. Since then, the company has been lobbying to obtain a 20-year

extension on the lease, but it has only been granted two successive

year long temporary permits.

 

Impacts of mining in the area are apparent. A report of the Indian

NGO Environment Support Group (ESG) proves that many fish varieties

have disappeared due to pollution, and points out that farmers

complain about the decline in agricultural productivity downstream

due to deposition of mine tailings. River pollution has provoked an

increase in cases of disease among villagers. In 1987 a 67 metre long

slurry pipeline broke and its leakage reached the Yennehole River,

which led to severe environmental damage.

 

The only action supposedly undertaken by KIOCL to mitigate the

impacts on forests and rivers in the area has been to plant alien

trees! The company adduces having implemented a "reforestation"

programme by planting 7.5 million acacia, eucalyptus and other alien

tree species. If such claims were true it would make things even

worse, since the substitution of a portion of forest by a plantation

prevents the regeneration of the secondary forest, thereby

impoverishing the environment. Both mining and plantations are a

direct cause of deforestation. Nevertheless that of Kudremukh

constitutes a particular case where both activities combine to

destroy the forest.

 

At present the State Government has ordered an environmental impact

study be undertaken before an extension on the lease is granted.

However, this is not seen as a sufficient guarantee by local

environmentalists. Leo Saldanha from the Environment Support Group

says: "I sincerely believe that a systematic public campaign is the

most appropriate option to ensure mining ends in Kudremukh. Nothing

like the people's will to bend a government that is intent on

violating public commitments and the law."

 

Article based on information from: Drillbits & Tailings; 18/8/2000.

Volume 5, Number 13

************************************************************

 

- Laos: Subsidies for Swedish profits in the forestry sector

 

On 7th November 2000 the formal opening of a US$2.9 million

laminated-wood processing factory took place at Nabong Farm, 30

kilometres from Vientiane, the capital of Lao PDR. The factory will

initially sell timber pallets to IKEA, the Swedish retailing giant,

and in future will produce furniture under the trademark Vicwood.

Financing came from a series of loans --US$550,000 from IKEA,

US$800,000 from the International Finance Corporation, the private

sector arm of the World Bank, and US$300,000 from Swedfund, the

Swedish IFC counterpart. The timber will come from Burapha's

1,200 hectares of Eucalyptus camaldulensis plantations, and from the

Asian Development Bank's Industrial Tree Plantations project, which

aims to establish 10,000 hectares of plantations in Laos.

 

Burapha's publicity materials claim that the factory will bring

"beautiful hardwoods" to "discerning world markets without

devastating the natural tropical forests". However, while IKEA has

found a new source of cheap timber, with or without Burapha's factory

project the logging of Laos' forests continues.

 

The Burapha Group is structured perfectly to gain the most from the

subsidies available for plantation development in Laos. The company

is a subsidiary of the Swedish forest industry company Silvi Nova AB,

and in Laos consists of three companies: BAFCO (Burapha Agroforestry

Co. Ltd.); NAFCO (Nabong Farm Co. Ltd.); and BDC (Burapha Development

Consultants Co. Ltd.). The first two companies are commercial

ventures --BAFCO produces and exports wood based products from its

own plantations, and NAFCO is a dairy farm which supplies Vientiane

with dairy products, chicken and eggs. BDC however plays a very

different role, being the largest consulting firm in Laos, providing

advice on financial analysis, engineering, environment, forestry,

agriculture and livestock and rural development.

 

In the early 1990s Burapha Development Consultants (along with Jaakko

Poyry) won a contract for consultancy services for the Asian

Development Bank's US$16 million Industrial Tree Plantations Project.

Today, the Burapha Group factory in Nabong buys timber from

eucalyptus plantations established under the ADB project.

 

In 1995 Jaakko Poyry and Burapha produced a report for the ADB

commenting on the Lao Government's laws on plantations, Directive

186. Among the consultant's recommendations were that export taxes

and transport taxes should be reduced. In other words, the

consultants recommend increasing their company's profits at the

expense of villagers' land and livelihoods.

 

When the Lao Government gets advice from forestry consultants through

a project funded by the Asian Development Bank, it may believe that

it is getting the best advice that money can buy. In Burapha's case

however there is a clear conflict of interest. The company is

providing advice recommending more subsidies through the ADB to

produce cheap timber which Burapha then buys and exports. No wonder

that a Burapha representative in Vientiane said about the ADB

project, "The project for Burapha has been a success, I'm not sure

about the project as a whole".

 

By: Chris Lang, e-mail: chrislang@t-online.de

************************************************************

 

- Malaysia: Campaign against plantation and pulp mill project in

Sabah

 

A plantation project that would occupy about 3% of the area of Sabah,

in northern Borneo, and provoke the clearcutting of 6% of its

dwindling primary forests is being promoted in Kalabakan by a joint-

venture between the State-owned company Innoprise Corporation Sdn

Bhd, Lions Group of Malaysia and the China Fuxing Pulp and Paper

Industries of China. The plantation and pulp and paper mill

megaproject, whose cost has been evaluated in U$S 1.1 billion, will

require the felling of 240,000 hectares of forest to be replaced by a

massive monoculture plantation of black wattle trees (Acacia mangium)

--also known as dry acacia or mangium tree-- a fast growing tree

native to Australia.

 

The project has sparked criticism because of its expected impacts and

for not having even adhered to the weak legal environmental

requirements existing in Sabah. According to the Sabah Conservation

of Environment Prescribed Activities, any forest which is cleared for

the felling of timber covering an area of 500 hectares or more or any

development of forest plantation of 500 hectares or more requires an

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). Nevertheless 12,000 hectares

of the land of the proposed project have already been logged without

a single EIA done. Innoprise Corporation has claimed that no EIA is

required since the logging operation was approved before the State

EIA requirement was enforced, and announced the logging of another

33,000 hectares. The company completely ignores the Federal

Government's Environment Quality Act of 1974 and the Environmental

Quality Order of 1987 which oblige to perform EIA for these kind of

activities. Sahabat Alam Malaysia (SAM) --Friends of the Earth

Malaysia-- has denounced that by allowing the logging to proceed

without an EIA, the Sabah Government is completely disregarding the

environmental impacts of the logging activities and is manipulating

the law in favour of the interests of big companies and to the

detriment of forest conservation.

 

It is reasonably feared that this huge plantation will provoke

deletereous impacts on the environment. The plantation area will cut

the biggest remaining block of continuous forest in the region which

extends between the Danum Valley and the Maliau Basin, both

classified as Class One Protection Areas. The area contains high

biodiversity levels, including 120 mammal, 280 bird, and more than

2500 tree species. This biodiversity rich ecosystem is in danger of

being substituted by a uniform and biodiversity poor agrosystem.

Already wild animals are reported to have been sighted more often,

probably fleeing from the logged area. Since the land of the proposed

project is mostly steep, felling for plantations will expose the soil

to direct erosion by rainfall. Sediments could reach the coastal

mangrove vegetation in Cowie Bay, depleting marine resources.

Consequences are already apparent: with only 12,000 hectares logged

the Danum Valley has been recently flooded. Local microclimate will

also be affected because often once the rainforest is replaced with a

plantation it will dry and heat up. Additionally, this could create

negative conditions for the plantation itself, which would become

more prone to fires.

 

The effects of pulping and bleaching are also threatening. The use of

chlorine in bleaching the pulp has caused the industry to be the

third largest source of dioxin and its related compounds in the

world. This problem is further compounded by the fact that Malaysia

still has no policy on dioxin damage prevention. Carbon dioxide,

sulphur oxides and chloroform are some of the polluting gases emitted

by this industry. Furthermore about 300 chemicals, among them organic

pollutants, chlorophenicols, acidic and organichlorine compounds have

been identified in pulp and paper mill effluents. 

 

To stop further destruction, SAM has called the State Government of

Sabah and the Federal Government to halt all further logging

activities, take action against the parties that are responsible for

logging the 12,000 hectares of forest without an EIA, undertake a

comprehensive EIA of the project, seek extensive and genuine feedback

from the public in relation to the reviewing of the EIA, review as a

whole given the magnitude and scale of its expected environmental

impacts. Additionally an international campaign has been launched to

oppose this project. Those interested in participating are invited to

visit our new web site (www.wrm.org.uy) under Action Alerts - October

2000.