David South School of Forestry Auburn University, AL USA Dear David, Thank you very much for your comments on my article "The dangers of monoculture tree plantations" and for the information you provide about the South African experience. I would like to make the following comments: 1) Being a forester myself I can easily understand your feelings and those of foresters in general when someone criticizes tree plantations. My standpoint is not against tree plantations but against large industrial monocultures in general (be it rice, sugarcane, rubber, wheat or trees). There is enough evidence to show that such type of monocultures -modelled on industry- have negative impacts, both social and environmental, which could be avoided with a different approach to production. We should therefore aim at fulfilling human needs (food, fibres, wood, etc.) while at the same time caring for the environment and benefitting the local communities. This would mean shifting from monocultures to diversified agricultural systems, which modify nature in a manner compatible with long term social and environmental sustainability. 2) On the issue of water consumption I totally agree with you that there are two posible ways of measuring such consumption: per hectare or per weight of biomass produced. I should have stated cleary that I was referring to consumption per hectare, because my main concern in not centred on the plantation itself but on its possible impacts on any given region. According to the data you provide on South Africa, the scrub-fynbos allows 53% of rainfall to end up in streams and/or groundwater, while pine monocultures result in only 27% ending up in streams/groundwater. The area outside the plantation will therefore receive less water than before. This could have impacts on people or the environment outside the planted area if the latter were large enough. This is why I always refer to LARGE monocultures. 3) On consumption per hectare, you agree with me when you say that "any crop (monoculture or not) that produces 15 tons/ha/yr will use more water/ha than a crop that only produces 2.5 tons/ha/yr". What can happen when instead of 1 hectare you have hundreds of thousands of hectares of pine or eucalyptus monocultures growing at 40-50 tons/ha/yr? This is now happening in many countries in the world such as Brazil, Indonesia, South Africa, Chile, Uruguay, and many others. 4) On the issue of water-use efficiency for biomass production, I must say that your point of view is forester-biased (I know, because I would have totally agreed with you a few years ago). We have all been trained to view the forest (or the plantation) as trees that produce wood for industry. We therefore tend to measure efficiency on that basis alone (although in your case account is taken of other tree biomass). But it is only the tree that counts. From my present standpoint, I try (not always successfully) to see the broader picture, which includes impacts (both positive and negative) to other related ecosystems or agricultural productions, to the regional hydrological cycle, to soils, to other acompanying flora, to wildlife and to people (who may use the forest for many purposes). To say that the pine monoculture is more efficient in the use of water for (tree) biomass production may be true, but on its own this does not mean much, because all the other components of the equation are not taken into account. Perhaps the native vegetation is seen as more efficient in the use of water to provide fodder to the local people's cattle? Or wildlife is an important component of their diet? Or "weeds" are used for different purposes? If the plantation does not provide fodder or a habitat for wildlife or does not allow the growth of those "weeds", then the use of water by the system will not be seen by the local people as efficient as that of the native vegetation . I believe that we cannot think only in terms of an individual landowner using "his/her" water in a more efficient manner, but that we should focus more on the impacts on the region (and its people) as a whole. Finally, I wish to thank you for having voiced your concerns and I hope that we will keep in contact to continue discussing the plantations issue. Large monoculture tree plantations are mushrooming in the Third World, with support from the World Bank, UN agencies and cooperation agencies. Many NGOs and communities are very worried about this issue and there is a need to involve open-minded foresters in this discussion. I sincerely hope that you will be interested in participating in such discussion. You might be interested to know that there is an open electronic conference (forest.paper) in the APC (Association for Progressive Communications) network, aimed at facilitating this discussion. I look forward to hearing from you soon, Best wishes, Ricardo Carrere Instituto del Tercer Mundo Casilla de Correo 1539 Montevideo URUGUAY Tel: +598 2 496192 Fax: +598 2 419222 E-mail: rcarrere@chasque.apc.org David South School of Forestry Auburn University, AL 36849-5418 dsouth@forestry.auburn.edu 205-844-1022 205-844-1084 (FAX)
Mail converted by
MHonArc 1.1.0