>From: Takehito Nagashima > Japan is said to be a country of tree, but now result of so much devloping, we >lost many forest. To me, Japanese are destructing so much environment that we >have to think about our mother earth again and we must make better forest- >policy. REPLY FROM: David South I want to make a few comments about forests and plantations in Japan. Japan has about 10.2 million hectares of plantations. Japan has about 24.1 million hectares of forests and woodlands. Japan has about 37.5 million hectares of land. Japan has about 375 thousand hectares of pastures/meadows. This means that 27% of the landbase in Japan is in tree plantations. THIS IS THE HIGHEST PERCENTAGE OF ANY COUNTRY. Likewise, 14.9 million hectares of forests are native/natural. This means that about 37% of the landbase in Japan is in natural stands. I think it can be argued that the above is good forest policy. Unlike many other countries, only a small amount of forest land has been converted to pastures. I believe the policy of not converting forests to pastureland is a good forest policy. I also believe that relying heavily on plantations for a source of industrial wood is better than many countries who rely mainly on natural stands as a source of industrial wood. Japan has a population of about 125 million. Japan has about 816 square meters of plantation for each person. For 1991, wood production in Japan was about 28.272 million m3 (or about 0.22 m3/person/yr) Likewise, Japan imported about 47.018 million m3 in 1991 (or about 0.37 m3/person/yr) (about 66% of the wood imported was from developed countries: USA, USSR, Australia, NZ, Canada) If my math is correct, wood consumption in Japan is about 0.6 m3/person/yr. Compare this to the USA at about 2.4 m3/person/yr. Japan has a population growth rate of only 0.3% Many other countries have much higher population growth rates (the United States is about 1%; Ethiopia about 3.4%). It would be good if other countries that sell wood to Japan would adopt a forest policy similar to Japan. That is, (a) protect native forests by relying mostly on plantations to supply wood; (b) protect native forests by not converting forests to pastures (eat less red meat); (c) protect native forests by importing plantation wood from New Zealand; (d) protect native forests by being efficient (i.e. not wasting wood). (e) protect native forests by keeping the population growth low. Other countries could also protect native forests by establishing plantations on pastures. I believe the above should be considered when making "better" forest policy. David South School of Forestry Auburn University, AL 36849-5418 dsouth@forestry.auburn.edu 334-844-1022 334-844-1084 (FAX)
Mail converted by
MHonArc 1.1.0