On June 21, Mr. Nelson Wong of the Malaysian Timber Council posted some intriguing questions in reaction to a WWF Media Briefing entitled "WWF Opposes ISO Forest Certification" of June 12, 1996. This briefing was released at the occasion of the WWF seminar 'Forests for Life' in Brussels. A few remarks along the lines suggested by Mr. Wong (please refer to Mr. Wong's original posting for the full text of his message and questions): Q #1: Independence of FSC? There has been no answer yet forthcoming to Treemail's open letter to Bruce Cabarly, FSC Board Director, and copied to this list, dated 20 May, 1996. There, a similar question was raised: "Does this rule of independence not apply to the FSC itself, specifically for the case of WWF as both a Teakwood contract partner and as main sponsor to FSC?" If information that has reached our office is correct, the Director of the Board will announce the retirement from this position before long, so it can well be that an answer to the open letter may never materialize. Q #2: Superiority of FSC? I am aware of at least two points that have been claimed in favor of FSC's superiority. (1) The FSC has an operational system established worldwide, and therefor any development of alternatives would constitute a duplication of efforts. (2) The FSC guarantees quality control over the entire chain of custody. Q #3: FSC chain of custody monitoring? Monitoring of the chain of custody, and the quality of its certifying agencies, can thus be trusted to be operational. Q #4: Who certifies FSC? To the best of my knowledge, FSC has not applied for membership of IFA, arguably this is internationally the most appropriate body to oversee accreditors. Background: Now that WWF has so clearly labelled the mere proposal for the ISO14001 standard as a "sham certification scheme" in its Media Briefing, it is perhaps interesting to inform this readership on the way WWF is informing Dutch "professional users and policy makers" on the FSC. The following quotes are from the book "Naar een houtbare wereld", ISBN 90-74595-07-3, which has been circulated widely as of the last quarter of 1995. The book depicts WWF as a key in-country information point for matters related to the FSC. Following translations are by Treemail, with full disclaimer; the readers are refered to the original source for reference. In the context of what follows below, it is important to memorize that the FSC has accredited the first four certifiers late in February 1996, and that this accreditation till today specifically excludes any plantation related activities or products. First of all, the book is adorned with three organizations' names on the front cover. One is the new FSC logo and acronym, another is the WWF-NL name Wereld Natuur Fonds, and the third is WWF (which in Dutch refers to WWF-INT, as the NL branch is called WNF in Dutch) with a panda. -beginning of quotes from WWF's book on FSC- Meanwhile 5 million ha of forest have been FSC certified (p5 and p27). The 19 areas where these forests are located are (in part): Malaysia, PNG, Brasil, USA and Indonesia (p27). The UK 1995 group has established criteria which -according to the book- result in "a kind of pre-FSC certification" (p19). In a section that describes the process from the first phone call to obtaing an FSC certificate, the role of the 'peer reviewers' is outlined. In it the following is stated: "If they [the peer reviewers, Treemail's note] find that the company meets the criteria, the company receives the FSC-certificate (p20)." In a chapter called "How much FSC timber is available, and where can it be had: Timber from FSC-certified sources is available on the Dutch market, albeit on a limited scale. The Ecological Trading Company has already delivered 100 m3 certified timber to Intergamma. Swift supplied to a church related organization in Ede. The timber from FSC-certified forests from the Seven Islands Company can already be ordered (all on p27). If you would like to order FSC-timber, you can. If you would like to know where FSC-timber can be purchased, WWF-NL has a list of addresses (p28). Alan Knight of B&Q (UK) is quoted on the matter of Malaysia, Indonesia and Canada working at their own certification scheme as follows: "We are talking to them in order to convince them that their certification scheme is pointless, unless their forests would also be FSC-certified" (p30). HRH Prince Charles is quoted as stating: "All Crown Dominions will be FSC-certified" (p31). As I have earlier informed to the readership of this list, also the certification of the Flor y Fauna plantations in Costa Rica by the FSC is heralded in this WWF publication "because of its good management" (p23), and that the plantation operation complies with "stringent ecological and economical criteria" (p23). WWF's Arnold van Kreefeld and Allard Stapel are named in the book as those who are responsible for its contents (p34). -end of quotes from WWF's book on FSC- All the above was published under presentation of WWF-INT's name and panda logo on the book's cover, and brought into circulation at a time when the FSC had not accredited a single certifier anywhere. One could be under the impression that WWF's endorsement of the Flor y Fauna plantations and Teakwood investment scheme and responsibility for the impossible claim to its certification by the FSC would be limited to the WWF Netherlands branch. To this, however, the following observations are made: 1. In a broadcast by NOVA television of November 23, 1995, the Director of WWF-NL, S. Woldhek, was interviewed at length on the Teakwood investment scheme. He refered to the Teakwood prograame as one of the few that has been able to attain "that important international certificate", and therewith successfully deceiveing the NOVA journalist into believing it was the FSC certifiate that was refered to (Joost Oranje, personal communication). Furthermore, the WWF-NL Director informed the Dutch viewers that he had phoned with the WWF-INT's DG in Gland, with the forestry responsible in Gland and with the WWF representative in CR earlier that same day and that: "all stated that they consider this to be an exemplary project." 2. At the occasion of a workshop on certification that was held to inform The Greens to the European Parliament on the issues of certification of forests and forest products on December 21-22, 1995, I have presented WWF-INT's forestry officer and representative at the meeting, P. Rosenberg, with a copy of one of the OHRA/WWF advertisements containing the impossible claim of FSC certification obtained for the Flor y Fauna plantations. In addition, I have provided him with a copy of a video tape of the NOVA broadcast at the meeting. Mr. P. Rosenberg thanked me and assured that, with the aid of Dutch personnel at the head office in Gland, they would study these materials carefuly. 3. On February 29, 1996, WWF-INT's DG, Claude Martin, wrote a letter to WWF-NL's Director in an apparent endoresement of the WWF-NL contract and involvement with the Teakwood investment scheme. WWF-NL have had this letter made public through OHRA (presented as production 29 at RCC hearing of the Teakwood case). Ekelmans den Hollander, OHRA's legal representatives at the RRC hearing, have interpreted this letter before the RCC as follows: "From this, it is abundantly clear that WWF-INT fully backs WWF-NL." Mr. Wong, let me recap the above. It is not at all for a bureaucracy under to try and draw public attention away from an ongoing controversy. As a rule, this is done by having the top guns sounding the alarm over an entirely different subject. Through double position WWF holds, both as a contract partner timber production and as a main promotor and donor of the international FSC accreditation scheme, it is suddenly confronted with the complex realities of this subject. Thus, in analysis, it is perhaps simply embarrassment over the Teakwood scandal that has triggered WWF into its choice of the wording "sham certification scheme" when commenting on the ISO14001 proposal. WWF is after all a relatively novel player in international forestry. Time will tell what an ISO response will entail, if they find it worthwhile to produce any. In view of he not so innocent interests that are at stake, it remains to be seen if this latest and so strongly worded WWF opposition to developments that may be incongruent with an FSC monopoly ought to be considered as intentional, as mere nervousness or as an example of a rather bearish behaviour. One would hope that the avenue of cooperation between stakeholders can remain to be perceived as a viable option, in the interest of our wolrd's poor forests. As a final remark, one is tempted to cite the caption from an article in a newsletter produced by Friends of the Earth Netherlands of March 27, 1993: "The Panda has gone astray in a teak forest." Paul Romeijn Director Treemail Prins Bernhardlaan 37 6866 BW Heelsum The Netherlands tel & fax: +31 317 314860 E-mail: treemail@vr.nl
Mail converted by
MHonArc 1.1.0