Forwarded from the listowner's error mailbox: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 10:44:44 -0700 From: Rob Harrison <robh@u.washington.edu> Subject: Re: Community forestry and biodiversity Reply-to: robh@u.washington.edu Message-id: <34313A28.7D42@u.washington.edu> Organization: University of Washington References: <97Sep29.211046-0400_edt.346578-7986+2544@mail.bc.rogers.wave.ca> Most of the plantations in Brazil are exotics (Eucalyptus spp. predominantly), and their role in protecting natural forests by providing alterative wood sources is rarely acknowledged and little researched. The bulk of plantation forests that I saw established in Minas Gerais and Sao Paulo States were replacing former cattle ranchs (fazendas), not native forests. We are seeing the same pattern here in Western Washington on some of our agricultural land, where forests of Hybrid Poplar are being established on former agricultural land due to high prices for forest products and low prices for agricultural products. There is also a strong movement, best characterized by the "Mountains to Sound" Greenway, that is strongly in favor of retaining forestland in commercial forests in favor of other forms of land development. I can't comment on other parts of Brazil very well in terms of development patterns. For instance, in Para state I observed large areas of forest land being converted into fazendas, the opposite of what appears to be happening in more heavily populated Southeast Brazil. A few years ago, I had the opportunity to consult in Indonesia with Dr. Stan Gessel (now deceased). We encountered this "exotophobia" nearly everywhere we visited, with many foresters "absolutely sure" that Eucalyptus destroyed the soil and water resource of any areas where it was planted. No data, but the Indonesians pointed to "studies" done in India. Most of the "forest plantations" that we visited were utter failures, having been planted primarily to collect the government payment for, with little regard for quality of planting and competition control. We visited projects of Shell Corporation in Kalimantan (Borneo), which were carefully avoiding any established forest land and planting forests in alang-alang grassland areas (which are maintained by fire). The same for Indorayon on Sumatra. These were among the few successes in plantation forestry we saw. I understand that Shell later pulled out of Indonesia as a result of bad publicity over its forestry programs there. We constantly observed squatters and fuelwood gathers in Indonesia's protected forests, particularly on Sumatra, replicating the pattern of unregulated fuelwood gathering in India. Fire was also a primary tool for removing the forest and clearing agricultural land. In general, this clearing appeared quite small-scale. Makes me wonder about the justification of the press blaming "multinational corporations" for the fires that are presently burning in Indonesia. My guess is that most of those fires are being set in land that is not in forest production and owned by forest-products companies, which would be more likely to protect the area to ensure future production. Certainly, many of those fires were set to clear the land for agriculture. ****************************************************** Rob Harrison Dept. of Ecosystem Science 206-685-7463 voice & Conservation 206-685-3091 fax Box 352100 Univ. of Washington Seattle WA 98195-2100 mailto:RobH@u.washington.edu ******************************************************
Mail converted by
MHonArc 1.1.0