Tasmania's Clearcuts Ending Up as Japanese Paper (posted: 2005-3-04)

5{p://www.wilderness.org.au/campaigns/forests">Australia's Wilderness Society in 2004 stepped up its campaign against Tasmanian logging company Gunns for the latter's logging practices in old growth forests which are among the world's oldest. According to the AWS, the majority of Gunn's woodchips from old growth forests in Tasmania's forest are sold to Japanese paper makers. In co-operation with Greenpeace (in Japan and Australia), the AWS succeeded in pressuring Gunns and its Japanese customers to extent that Gunns has now launched a lawsuit against the AWS and its staffers. The world's leading NGOs have united to condemn Gunns and are urging an embargo on its produce from clear cuts in Tasmania.

Gunns' "firebombing" of a clear cut following harvest

Some Japanese customers of Gunns are responding, while some are not. Ricoh, the leading electronics company and one of Japan's leading suppliers of copy paper, according to the AWS, in April 2004 called on its paper suppliers not to use old growth Tasmanian forests in their source materials.

Mitsubishi Corporation (the leading trading firm, involved in supplying Gunns' product to Japan) and its customer Mitsubishi Paper Mills have made pledges to phase out supply from old growth forests in Tasmania "as soon as possible"..

Other leading customers of Gunns are Japanese paper giants Oji Paper, Nippon Paper?��??��??��Daio Paper, Chuetsu Pulp and Paper have yet to make a clear statement on whether they intend to cease purchase from Gunns.

On February 23rd, 2005, Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace and other leading global NGOs united in their condemnation of Gunn's actions and their response to the Wilderness Society's campaign.

Results of a clearcut, Tasmania

All photos courtesy of the Australian Wilderness Society

Sumatra's Last Primary Forests Sold as Copy Paper in Japan (posted: 2005-3-14)

Asia Pulp and Paper (APP) is one of the world's largest paper manufacturing companies and has attracted a huge amount of controversy in the last decade. As well as being Asia's largest bankruptcy, with over 10 billion USD of debts including to leading Western financial institutions, the company's forestry practices have attracted almost universal criticism from NGOs. WWF, an NGO which positions itself as one which can work with industry to solve issues, admits that its negotiations with APP had largely failed and it is reverting back to advising customers to boycott or pressure APP to change. Friends of the Earth UK and others have launched a campaign against APP which highlights what they claim is out-of-control logging of Indonesia's remaining low land primary forests. The net result is that a large portion of APP's European paper business has vanished, due to customer boycotts. The majority of APP's paper/pulp exports are now destined for Japan and China. The Indonesian Minister of Forestry last year estimated USD500mn of APP's sales were to Japan.

Another key Japanese customer of APP is Askul, Japan's leading office supply retailer who sells APP-branded paper via their Web site and throughout stores in Japan. Leading trading firm Itochu has been also named as a key business partner of APP in Japan.

Japan's leading office supply retailer Askul re-sells paper made by Asia Pulp and Paper, widely accused of unsustainable and destructive forestry in Indonesia (image taken from www.askul.co.jp)

Forest Alert.org's research shows that about 30% of Japan's import of forest products from Indonesia is used by its paper industry.

APP (Asia Pulp and Paper) and APRIL (Asia Pacific Resources International Holdings Limited) are Indonesia's largest pulp and paper companies. More than a third of APP's wood raw materials are deemed to be illegal (almost half of the pulpwood for APP's Indah Kiat pulp mill is illegal), and the company plans to abandon consumption of plantation pulpwood from 2004.

?APP distributes directly in Japan through its subsidiary APP Japan, which is partially owned by Itochu Corporation.? Meanwhile, the remnants of Sumatra important lowland forests are ending up as copy paper for consumption in Japan. ForestAlert urges you to contact?Itochu to demand an immediate end to procurement from APP and other High Value Conservation forest areas. Vague promises of phasing out such procurement "as soon as possible" are not enough and are characteristic of corporate stalling tactics on this issue.

HSBC, Credit Suisse Make A Mockery of Their Environmental Policy (posted: 2007-3-01)

HSBC, Credit Suisse Make A Mockery of Their Environmental Policy

Major news media in Hong Kong reported[1] that two of the world�fs largest European banks, Credit Suisse and HSBC are to be arranging a USD 250 million share placement on the Hong Kong market in early March 2007 on behalf of the Samling Group, one of Malaysia�fs largest forestry companies.? The Samling Group has faced almost constant attack from pressure groups in Malaysia and internationally for the last thirty years over its allegedly destructive logging practices and corrupt business methods.? The Group has its origins in northeast Sarawak where it been responsible for the logging of most of the primary forest in the region.? It has since moved on to logging of primary forests in Cambodia, Guyana and through subsidiaries, in Papua New Guinea.? Only a small portion of its forestry activities involve managed plantation forests, through a recently acquired operation in New Zealand.[2]? The involvement of these two banks in helping Samling to raise funds appears to be in direct conflict of their respective pledges on supporting sustainable forestry.?

HSBC won the Financial Time�fs Sustainable Bank of the Year award in 2006 and was noted for its �gForest Land and Forest Products Sector Guideline (2004)�h.[3]? In this, HSBC states that it will not provide financial services �gin respect of commercial logging operations in primary moist forest�h.? Clearly Samling�fs logging operations fall almost entirely in this category, which would seem to make HSBC in default of its own policy.? HSBC tempers its policy by stating that it will work with forestry companies which, although they are not in compliance with HSBC stated policies at present, are working towards these goals and will comply by 2009.? It remains very unclear how Samling can wean itself from logging primary rainforests within two years.? Further, the only tropical forest FSC (Forest Stewardship Council) certificate Samling did have (for a concession in Guyana) was reportedly withdrawn earlier this year due to �gsystematic major non-conformities�h.? Relying almost completely on natural tropical forests for its timber and having its only tropical forest FSC certificate yanked does not demonstrate commitment by Samling to adhere to HSBC�fs pledges.

What Can you Do?

Send an e-mail of protest to HSBC and Credit Suisse demanding they withdraw from the Samling share offering.??

HSBC Contacts: http://www.hsbc.com/hsbc/investor_centre/shareholder-contacts

Credit Suisse Contacts: http://www.credit-suisse.com/investors/en/contacts_investor.html

Contact the provider of your pension fund, mutual or investment funds and demand that they do NOT buy into the Samling share offering.

Appendix: A sample of press and other reports of Samling are provided.

January 2007 - FSC Withdrawn The FSC (Forest Stewardship Council), the world�fs leading body providing certificates of well managed forests, has suspended Samling�fs only FSC certificate relating to its logging operations in Guyana.? The reason was cited as �gsystematic major non-conformities�h.? Some leading buyers in the West, such as B&Q, specific suppliers must demonstrate FSC in their wood as a precursor to buying.[4]

late 1980s to present ? Destruction of Northeast Sarawak�fs Forests: The Samling Group and its subsidiary companies have fought a highly publicized battle with indigenous groups in northeast Sarawak over the last quarter century.? In particular, the Penan tribe claim Samling has systematically destroyed their ancestral homelands and engaged in corrupt and sometimes violent practices in their logging operations in the region.? Logging rates in Sarawak in the 1990s were among the world�fs highest and declared to be unsustainable by the ITTO (International Tropical Timber Organization), a trade body.? Samling remains one of the three leading operators in Sarawak.[5][6]

2002 ? Accused of Illegal Logging in PNG: A Samling group company, Concord Pacific fought a highly publcised battle with Greenpeace and local forest dwellers in Papua New Guinea over what the pressure group claims was Concord�fs blatant disregard of legal practices in forestry management in the country.? [7]

Illegal Logging (posted: 2005-2-01)

Illegal Logging

The Core of the Issue

The World Bank estimates that producer countries annually loose between US$10 billion and US$15 billion due to illegal logging (which contributes to illegal timber).

Based on Japan's import statistics and assumptions about the percentage of illegal timber and rubberwood in the composition of those statistics, ForestAlert.org estimates that the roundwood equivalent volume and import value of Japan's imports of illegal timber were in the order of 10 million cubic metres and Yen250 billion (c.US$ 2 billion)(c.i.f.) during each of the last few years. Although Indonesia supplies roughly half of this, the percentage which China supplies (some 30% by import value in 2003) is rising.

Although unauthorised logging - or improperly authorised logging - will account for a substantial proportion of the total, fraud and particularly smuggling may well account for a higher share. Relevant information: A and B, and also C.

Legality matters in part because dealing in illegal goods (from timber through counterfeit CDs and cigarettes to the trafficking of women) tends to be a criminal offence, in part alsobecause illegality tends to imply that both the indigenous communities whose forest is being logged and the producer country's economy are being impoverished by (/not properly compensated for) the loss of long-term forest value (/unsustainable forest management) - making it harder to alleviate poverty, enhance the country's credit worthiness, and obviate dependence on "aid" provided by tax payers in other countries.

Failure by logging and other timber companies to properly pay all applicable taxes, duties and fines to the relevant authorities - making the corresponding timber illegal - adds to the loss of local and national revenue.

Likewise, illegal timber depresses the market price for timber products and gives rise to unfair competition - the USA's timber industry estimates that it looses US$460 million annually in lost exports (and may loose a comparable sum from imports substituting for products made of timber grown in forests within the USA).

Logging enterprises can be brought to justice outside the country in which they operate (in a number of countries which import illegal timber from them), particularly under anti-money-laundering legislation.

Some caveats: low levels of illegality would appear to exist in countries which

a) choose to not investigate the main culprits (i.e. well-connected logging companies) - as in Burma, Cambodia, Cameroon, Indonesia, Malaysia, Russia - and the contracts of "independent" forest crime monitoring units tend to preclude such investigations;

b) have such a plethora of laws and conflicting jurisdictions that it is difficult to determine what is the applicable law (but solutions include taking into account the intent of the country's constitution and the interests of all stakeholders, and giving primacy to indigenous people over in-migrants) - as in Indonesia; and

c) have such weak laws as to make legal what in most other countries would be considered illegal (as in Brazil - which has recently watered down relevant laws in order to minimise illegality).

Small, independent suppliers have more reason to be ignorant of the origin of the timber products which they sell than, say, national chains.

In the vehicle and electronic goods manufacturing industries, quality checks of components to be used during product assembly are routinely carried out. If too many defects are found in a sample, then the corresponding batch is rejected. Such checks are akin to assessing the legality of timber along the chain of supply from forest to end-use - illegal timber being akin to defective components.

Established technology and management procedures to audit such chains of supply tend to be straight forward, particularly for long term supply contracts and where the suppliers involved wish to conduct their business properly.

The percentage of illegal timber in the imports which Japan declares as being from (rather than grown in) some of its main supplying countries might, on average, be as high as 90% for Indonesia and 30% for China, Malaysia, and Eastern Russia. The percentage for certain products may be much higher, especially those manufactured in China.

Importers have no basis to complain about any rise in cost that is attributed to ensuring that their supplies of wood-based products are legal. Any cost increase attributed toensuring that their imports of such productsderive from sustainably managed forest should be exclude any costsrequired to ensure that thechain of supply of thoseimports (back to forest origin) is legal.

Emergency in Sarawak - the Penan's Last Stand (posted: 2005-7-01)

The Final Chapter for Sarawak's Primary Forests

Still the logging goes on

The international community and local indigenous and environmental groups within Malaysia have long criticized the unabated logging that has taken place in Sarawak in the last 30 years or so.  The fiercely independent Malaysian government has largely ignored this pressure, arguing its right to exploit its forest resources under its own terms in the name of economic development. Whoever is morally right is now beside the point.  Local experts estimate that more than 95% of Sarawak's original forest cover has now been logged at least once.  Less than 2% of the land area has been set aside for protection as national parks compared to 5% for Peninsula Malaysia and 10% for Indonesia.  It is likely that the few remaining portions of unprotected primary forest in Sarawak are in mountainous regions close to the border with Indonesia, and these are now being hastily logged by the five leading logging groups active in Sarawak and their myriad of subsidiaries, shell companies and associated contractors.  The State of Sarawak, its newly privatized forestry ministry alludes to sustainable harvesting of the forests on a 25 year cycle and allocation of vast tracts of land for palm and cash crop cultivation.  The net result is, as most biologists agree, destruction of the delicate 100 million year old forest ecosystem with the disappearance of the canopy.  A secondary effect now evident all over the country is an almost universal pollution of fresh water rivers and streams with silt which has severely impacted both the inland and marine fishing sectors.  Sadly, the hornbill, Sarawak's national bird and symbol of many of its tourism advertisements, is now rarely seen in a forest environment devoid of the once majestic trees 80m or more in height.  As large winged birds, the hornbill prefers to nest in the very tall trees.

The Penan's last stand

The plight of Sarawak's forest ecosystems has been symbolized by the plight of its indigenous people who rely on the forest for sustenance.  The nomadic Penan of northern Sarawak have attracted the most attention, as international campaigners like Bruno Manser highlighted the contrast between their peaceful, harmonious lifestyle and the destruction wrought by the logging industry on their traditional lands.  The plight of the remaining 200 or so nomadic Penan looks dire in terms of their ability to continue in the manner they have been accustomed to for hundreds of years.  Many of the remaining Penan are locked in a state of constant confrontation with the logging industry and the local government for preservation of their remaining forest lands.  While numerous land-rights cases are passing slowly through the legal system, the logging continues, with the local people being no match for the well funded and connected logging concession holders and their contractors.

An example of how the State of Sarawak and the logging industry are determined to free all remaining primary forest in the state for exploitation can be seen in the struggle of Penan chief Along Sega and his group.  He has been claiming an area of approximately 260 square km in the Limbang district in northeast Sarawak, near the famed Kelabit highlands.  After years of watching his forest area encroached by loggers from all sides, in mid 2004, Chief Along reluctantly agreed to accept an area of around 15 square km as his group's territory, hoping that this tiny area would be spared from logging.  Limbang Trading (a unit of Samling Strategic, one of Malaysia's largest logging firms) enacted the agreement with Along, but in early 2005, he was informed by the local branch of the Ministry of Forestry that the 15 square km would be logged and turned into tree plantations.  Clearly, Samling (the overall concession holder in the area) and the Ministry of Forestry colluded to deceive the local Penan and negotiate in bad faith. 

A new national park?

The entire area lies in a region which the Chief Minister of Sarawak has, since 2002 been considering for National Park status (the Pulong Tau National Park) due to the areas high value conservation merits (e.g. Sarawak's highest peak, Mt Murud and some of the last remaining unprotected primary forest in Sarawak which forms a continuous corridor into the remote mountainous forests of Indonesia.  Negotiations for formation of the park are painfully slow, and it is clear the leading concession holders are calling the shots.  They continue to log aggressively in the area of the proposed park and according to several NGOs, including the Environmental Investigation Agency, make forays across the border and illegal bring logs from Indonesia for processing in their camps in Sarawak.  The company who controls most of the logging concessions in the area is Samling Srategic.  This company has been the target of pressure from global conservation groups for forestry practices in Sarawak and elsewhere.  The company engages mostly in logging in tropical primary forests.  The biodiversity value of any potential Pulong Tau park is decreasing monthly as Samling seems determined to extract all economic value prior to the area being declared a park.

Devastation in Northeast Sarawak

Destined for Japan

Insiders in the logging industry in Sarawak all agree that their best customers are in Japan.  Malaysia exports 7 million cubic meters of trees to Japan each year.  The leading Japanese importers from Sarawak in 2002 were Sumitomo Forestry (400,000 m3), Itochu (220,000 m3); Nanshu Industries (170,000 m3), Marubeni (110,000 m3), NishoIwai Nichimen and Ataka. (source - Lumber Weekly, Japan). All are listed companies and sensitive to shareholder pressure and potential damage to their reputation for sourcing from Sarawak's last remaining primary forests.  Most of the produce is used to produce plywood for use in housing construction in Japan.  Samling notes that its leading Japanese customers are Sumitomo Forestry and NisshoIwai Nichimen.

Full details of trade links in tropical forestry, particularly to Japan, can be seen at www.ForestAlert.org.

Details of the plight of the Penan can be found at www.bmf.ch.

Penan Chief Along Sega, pictured with Lee Ling Timber official Kong holding an agreement not to log in Along's territory, an agreement now broken by State Forestry officials.In June 2005, they stated that his people had no rights to the land they have lived in for generations and the land is open to logging and clearance.

Download this file here in PDF format.

Nippon Paper Asks for Comments on its Procurement Policy (posted: 2005-7-08)

Nippon Paper have recently asked for comments on their new environmnental
policy relating to purchasing of forest products.  You can see this at
http://www.np-g.com/e/csr/ideology/materials.html#basis.  We urge you to
tell Nippon Paper, through their Web site, that their Purchasing Policy
remains inadequate.  Nippon Paper continue to source wood chips made from
Tasmania's remaining primary forests, which constitute the tallest trees in
the world.  In their new policy, they make no mention of stopping this
practice.  Please send a message stating something like this -

"Nippon Paper's new purchasing policy remains inadequate.  I continue to be
concerned about Nippon Paper's sourcing of pulp/paper/woodchips from high
value conservation primary forests.  In particular, I protest your sourcing
from Gunns of Australia who are destroying Tasmania's remaining primary
forest.  I would like to see Nippon Paper state a definite target for phase
out of purchasing products made from High Value Conservation forests and
non-FSC/certified forests.  Until I see a clear committment from your
company on this, I will continue to urge a boycott of your products".

Simply go to http://www.np-g.com/e/csr/ideology/materials.html#basis and
fill out the questionnaire.  You can cut and paste the above text as a
comment if you agree with this.   While the deadline (July 19th 2005) for directly commenting on Nippon Paper's Web site has passed, ForestAlert understands that comments may be sent to np-g@env-r.com via e-mail.

How the West is Funding the Greatest Climate Change Culprit (posted: 2007-1-22)

In the name of fighting terrorism, the United States and G8 powers are funding the Indonesian security apparatus which is standing by as the country�fs forests are illegally burnt year after year. Repeated forest fires, condoned and often aided by the military in the world�fs third largest tropically forested nation are responsible, on average in each of the last ten years, for half the carbon emissions of the United States and more than five times the Kyoto Protocol�fs target for annual reduction!

Climate change has now reached a tipping point and it has launched countless business ventures and media stories as well as kick-started several political careers.? The message being pounded into consumers and industry is save energy and use less carbon intensive fuels.? Although very important, this is only half the equation, and the expensive and difficult half at that.? The high profile Stern Report states we risk losing between 5% and 20% of global GDP as a result of climate change[1].? The report also states that 20% of climate change emissions arise from man-made deforestation.? This involves carbon emissions from burning trees, soil and loss of the carbon sink.? However, the Stern report, which uses historical IPCC data averaged over a number of years, understates the absolutely huge impact on our climate caused by the deliberate and increased burning of forests in Indonesia, a phenomenon which has escalated since 1997.? This is the year when Indonesia�fs forest burning made headlines worldwide and caused billions of dollars of damage to the Southeast Asia region.? What has been less publicized is the contribution of this vast man-made burning on the world�fs carbon emissions.? Studies[2] have estimated that almost 2.5 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide were emitted during this season alone and with between 0.4 and 1 billion tonnes emitted annually since then in each burning season[3].? Let�fs put this number in perspective.? In 2007, the US emitted roughly 2 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide, less than the total from the 1997 fires in Indonesia.[4]? Further, the Kyoto agreement pledges to reduce carbon emissions worldwide by around 200 million tonnes by 2012, compared to 1990 levels, which is ONE TENTH of the 1997 burning figures from Indonesia. ?And the burning continues each year.

Thus we could achieve roughly FIVE times the entire Kyoto targets just by finding a way to stop burning Indonesia�fs forests.?? Now, Indonesia has the third largest primary rainforests in the world after Brazil and the Congo.? Aside from their potential to act as a carbon sink and absorb greenhouse gases, these forests are the home to 25% of the world�fs mammal species and other untold conservation treasures.? Each year around 4% of the remaining forest in Indonesia is cleared for the wood and to eventually cultivate palm oil.[5]? The destruction of Indonesia�fs forests will be a story told by future generations as one in which the world stood by and indeed facilitated in the destruction of the world�fs most precious concentration of biodiversity.? It is estimated that the Indonesian military receives 70% of its budget from illegal activities, largely exploitation of the vast but dwindling forests.? It has been widely accused of being complicit in forest burning and the Navy has been shown to protect illegal shipments of logs to foreign markets.? At the very least, the military stands by as national laws against logging and forest-burning are flouted.

So what does this have to do with the war on terror?? Since the 9-11 terrorist attacks and the Bali bombings, US and Western policy towards Indonesia has been focused almost exclusively on the perceived terror threat from Islamic extremists within the country.? A result has been the increase and lifting of restrictions on military aid to Indonesia, aid which prior to the terror attacks had been tied to performance on human rights, corruption and increasingly, forest management.? The US now provides 100 million USD per year.? In 2006, the US Senate removed all restrictions on such aid allowing it to fund the Indonesia military and police regardless of concerns over corruption or illegal activities.? The focus of other G8 powers towards Indonesia has followed a similar pattern.? So while our focus on Indonesia remains the war on terror, we are inadvertently funding massive destruction of one of our most precious biodiversity heritages whilst contributing significantly to climate change emissions. The Indonesian security apparatus remains the organization which, if not directly complicit in forest burning, is the single one which can help turn the tide.? Our engagement and funding of them does not prioritize solutions to the forest burning.? It should.? This is a low cost, low risk way of achieving untold gains in the war on climate change as well as terror.? We should demand the following at the very least.

??????????? Aid provided to Indonesia should be linked to the government�fs performance in combating forest fires and destruction.

• Military aid to Indonesia should be suspended pending resolution of investigations into the country�fs security apparatus�fs involvement into forest crimes.

To paraphrase Al Gore in �gThe Inconvenient Truth�h:? �g�cwe may just find that there are significant risks to humanity other than terrorism�c.�h.

This article has been collated by www.forestalert.org from publicly available sources.? Comments and questions should be directed to info@forestalert.org.