Treemail translates and informs, disclaims everything and refers readership to original source for reference. Wageningen University Newspaper, WUB #10, 14 March 1996 Article over 1+ pages Excerpts CASTLES IN THE AIR ... MADE FROM TEAKWOOD Teak Plantation Controversies Frustrate Forestry Sector. Sky high returns on investment and world records in the production of tropical timber. With these beautiful predictions and with support from the WWF-Netherlands insurance company OHRA lured thirteen thousand investors. They invested substantial amounts in young and petite Costa Rican teaktrees. Messages from a confused sector. The Dutch forestry sector is at its wits' end what to do about teak investment companies. Financial swingers, as a rule completely devoid of any forestry knowledge, rapidly unleashed a boom of investment funds that tie down Dutch private savings to tiny trees. ... The Teakwood entrepreneurs do not shy away from summoning critics before court. This happened to a former Flor y Fauna advisor, L.H.T. van Weezendonk, who openly criticized the promised high rates of return. Ohra lost the court case. The court hearing came as a real bomb shell. OHRA appeared to have increased the expected yields to 1,067 m3 per hectare. Source of these projections was remarkable: a bailiff. He had travelled to the plantation in 1993, supervised by a civil servant from the Ministry of Agriculture and one from the Ministry of International Cooperation. The civil servant from the Ministry of Agriculture endorsed the spectacular results and even considered them to be prudent. This was really taking it too far, observed Professor R.A.A. Oldeman. He analyzed the data that were presented and put them in the pillory in no mean terms. ... According to forestry faculty's K.F. Wiersum "WWF confuses means and goals." The organization made a one sided choice for the big money ... But WWF-NL does not budge an inch ... quiet diplomacy from the forestry faculty was of no avail. ... Sill, the whole affair can damage WWF-NLs good reputation. ... Under strong political pressure, the forestry sector works to stimulate trade in sustainably produced timber. Certification is an important means to reach that goal. ... The FSC portrays itself as THE international organization for accreditation of organizations such as the Rainforest Alliance. To this, absolute credibility is conditional; fumbling with untrue allegations in advertisements undermines this process. The anger amongst foresters further increased because the FSC never openly refuted the improprieties. Al the more so because WWF-NL is main sponsor to the FSC. ... Foresters frustrations reached their zenith when Ministers Zalm and van Aartsen [of Finance and Agriculture; Treemails note] answered questions raised in Parliament, following a television broadcast by NOVA. Zalm declared that because of the special character of the investments he could not legally supervise the investments. Van Aartsen added fuel to the fire by stating: "it has not been proven that the Teakwood plantations cannot reach their prognotised timber yields". He based this mainly on the findings by the civil servant who accompanied the bailiff, and who was no longer taken serious by forestry scientists. Many forestry academics experience vicarious shame ever since. Foresters slowly pool counter forces, because quiet diplomacy proved ineffective. Forestry consultant Romeijn attempts to strike up a public discussion over the internet. The discussion clearly demonstrates how high frustrations and indignations have risen. Via the net, Professor Centeno received over 3,000 letters from perturbed colleagues. ... WWF-NL headquarters ... prohibited its Wageningen branch to organize a public debate following the NOVA broadcast. OHRA and WWF-NL did, however, did go public on March 4, with a report prepared by scientists from the Costa Rican Centro Scientifico Tropical (CST). The researchers state in the executive summary that yields from 400 to 800 m3 appear attainable. ... According to de Graaf, Huizinga with his Flor y Fauna plantations can attain just over 400 m3 under extremely favorable conditions. This concerns the total timber mass, and not just those parts of the stems that can readily be sawn. The forestry faculty's staff member departs from his own research experiences, because the CST summary is totally unsound; the methodologies are not specified and essential data are lacking. "I read between the lines that the researchers do not realize that they have been tricked" states de Graaf. The researchers appear to base their findings on data provided by Flor y Fauna, who are themselves under debate. "I do not accept it when my students produce such a summary", adds colleague Wiersum. The bickering seems to degenerate into a repetition of moves. How can foresters react adequately in order to forestall the next sordid experience? De Graaf: "For scientists the only truth is reality. In this case it can be measured, but this should be done properly. To end the debate Flor y Fauna should give us permission to measure everything, but they won't. Where money reigns, this is what you can expect." Wiersum: "One is confronted with ones' ethical limits when so much money is involved. In the past the discussion was about the question if the faculty could collaborate with logging companies. Now the question has arisen if one has to distance oneself from organizations that, as part of afforestation, throw money about." Laurens Vogelezang
Mail converted by
MHonArc 1.1.0