Illegal logging continues to plague Madagascar’s rainforest parks


Despite government assurances that it would crack down on the rosewood trade, illegal logging continues in Madagascar’s rainforest parks, according to new information provided by sources on the ground and reported in Wildmadagascar.com.

The sources report logging in three parks: Mananara, Makira, and Masoala. All three are known for their high levels of biodiversity, including endangered lemurs.

Rosewood logs are being transported to Tamatave (Toamasina), Madagascar’s main port, despite a national moratorium on logging and export of precious hardwoods. Most rosewood ends up going to China, where it is in high demand for furniture.

The Malagasy sources report that local law enforcement—the new Brigade Mixte Forestière established to reduce logging—is impeded the Forest Ministry, which has failed to grant them the right to use search warrants on private property.

The sources also claim that rosewood confiscated by authorities is being stolen from official stockpiles.

Illegal logging exploded last year in the aftermath of a military coup that displaced the democratically-elected, but increasingly autocratic president, Marc Ravalomanana.

National parks, especially in the North-East of the country, were ransacked by loggers employed by timber barons who traditionally capitalize on political instability or natural disasters to replenish timber stocks and traffic ill-gotten wood.

Madagascar is now ruled by a “transition authority” that has so far shown little inclination to hold free and fair elections and has been be slow to address the logging crisis despite pressure from the international community.

Source: Wildmadagascar.com

Date:06/09/2010

Africa’s tropical forests ‘absorbing more carbon’


Trees across the tropics are getting bigger and offering unexpected help in the fight against climate change, scientists have discovered.

A report in the Guardian newspaper described how a study of the girth of 70,000 trees across Africa has shown that tropical forests are soaking up more carbon dioxide pollution that anybody realised.

Almost one-fifth of our fossil fuel emissions are absorbed by forests across Africa, Amazonia and Asia, the research suggests in the journal Nature.

Simon Lewis, a climate expert at the University of Leeds, who led the study, said: “We are receiving a free subsidy from nature. Tropical forest trees are absorbing about 18% of the carbon dioxide added to the atmosphere each year from burning fossil fuels, substantially buffering the rate of change.”

The study measured trees in 79 areas of intact forest across 10 African countries from Liberia to Tanzania, and compared records going back 40 years. “On average the trees are getting bigger,” Lewis said.

Compared to the 1960s, each hectare of intact African forest has trapped an extra 0.6 tonnes of carbon a year. Over the world’s tropical forests, this extra “carbon sink” effect adds up to 4.8bn tonnes of CO2 removed each year – close to the total carbon dioxide emissions from the US.

Although individual trees are known to soak up carbon as they photosynthesise and grow, large patches of mature forest were once thought to be carbon neutral, with the carbon absorbed by new trees balanced by that released as old trees die.

A similar project in South America challenged that assumption when it recorded surprise levels of tree growth a decade ago, Lewis said.

His study, he added, was to check whether the effect was global.

The discovery suggests that increased CO2 in the atmosphere could fertilise extra growth in the mature forests.

Lewis said: “It’s good news for now but the effect won’t last forever. The trees can’t keep on getting bigger and bigger.”

Helene Muller-Landau of the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute in Ancon, Panama, used a commentary piece in Nature to suggest that the forests could be growing as they recover from past trauma.

“Tropical forests that we think of as intact [could have] suffered major disturbances in the not-too-distant past and are still in the process of growing back,” she said.

Droughts, fire and past human activity could be to blame, she added: “This recovery process is known as succession and takes hundreds or even thousands of years.”

The research comes as efforts intensify to find a way to include protection for tropical forests in carbon credit schemes, as part of a new global climate deal to replace the Kyoto protocol.

Lee White, Gabon’s chief climate change scientist, who worked on the new study, said: “To get an idea of the value of the sink, the removal of nearly 5bn tonnes of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere by intact tropical forests should be valued at about £13bn per year.”

David Ritter, senior forest campaigner at Greenpeace UK, said: “This research reveals how these rainforests are providing a huge service to mankind by absorbing carbon dioxide from our factories, power stations and cars.

“The case for forest protection has never been stronger, but we must not allow our politicians to use this as an excuse to avoid sweeping emissions cuts here in the UK.”

Source: Guardian newspaper

Date: 18/02/2009

Prince calls for rainforest bills


Prince Charles has called for rich countries to pay an annual “utility bill” for the benefits given to the world by its rainforests, the BBC News website reports.

Speaking in the Indonesian capital, Jakarta, the prince called rainforests the “world’s greatest public utility”.

They act as an air conditioner, store fresh water and provide work, he said.

The proposal by the Prince’s Rainforest Project would generate funds allowing rainforest countries to change their practices and halt deforestation.

The Prince of Wales outlined the plan in a speech to the Indonesian President, Dr Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, and his cabinet in Jakarta.

He told the audience at the Merdeka Palace: “Indonesia and the other rainforest nations are stewards of the world’s greatest public utility.

“The rest of us have to start paying for it, just as we do for water, gas and electricity.”

He added: “Payments should have the characteristics of a commercial transaction, in the same way we pay for our water, gas and electricity.

“In return the rainforest nations would provide eco-services such as carbon storage, fresh water and the protection of biodiversity.”

The prince said the forests provided a livelihood for more than a billion people.

As developed nations were the driving force behind their destruction, through a demand for products like beef, palm oil, soya and logs, they should be billed for their protection, he said.

It is hoped that a large part of the funds raised from the “utility bills” would come from bonds issued by an international body.

Describing the form the annual billing could take, the prince said: “These emergency funds could be provided directly by developed world governments, perhaps from expanded development aid budgets, from surcharges on activities which cause climate change or from the auction of carbon market emission allowances.

“However, I hope that even in the short term the large part of the required funding could be provided by the private sector by subscribing to long-term bonds issued by an international agency.

“The issuing entity would pay the proceeds from the bonds to the rainforest nations. They in turn would use the money to re-orientate their economies to halt or refrain from deforestation.”

Earlier on his Indonesian visit, the Prince visited the Harapan Rainforest conservation project on the island of Sumatra as part of his 10-day tour of Asia.

Indonesia is the final leg of his tour. Prince Charles and the Duchess of Cornwall also visited Japan and Brunei, but he travelled to Indonesia alone as his wife has returned to Britain for other engagements.

Source: BBC News website

Date: 03/11/2008

Time to invest in nature’s capital


Amid the global financial crisis, it is time to recognise the wealth we enjoy from nature’s capital, says Andrew Mitchell, director of the Global Canopy Programme.

Writing on the BBC News website, he argued that there would be no government bailout if we fail to protect the vital services provided by the world’s forests.

The world’s largest gathering of conservation scientists and NGOs have been meeting in Barcelona to ask: “What price do we put on nature?”

In these extraordinary times of credit crunch and climate change, the world feels hitched to an uncertain roller coaster ride where we don’t know what to value any more.

What investors thought was safe as houses has turned out to be nothing more than the property of the poor disguised in a silver wrapper, enabling bankers to pocket billions.

In a curious way, all this chaos may turn out to be a good thing because it will force the world to ask: “Are we creating wealth that’s worth having?”

A wine broker said to me recently: “The thing about investing in a first growth is, the more the world drinks a good vintage, the more valuable it gets.”

So could disappearing forests one day be a safer investment than housesA major new theme of this Congress of the World Conservation Union (IUCN) is about how we value natural capital, which up to now has not appeared on company balance sheets.

I believe the current financial crisis may force the global community to right that wrong, along with many others, because we all want a more stable economy.

However, in global markets today, rainforests are worth more dead than alive. Poor and often opaque governments, with little to sell, offer their rainforests to raise revenue, attracting largely risk capital with strings attached.

The only way to do this is to convert rainforests into something else, usually timber, beef, soy or palm oil that Westerners, and now prosperous Asians, have a burgeoning appetite for.

Most deforestation today is enterprise driven and funded by hedgefunds, pension funds, and other sources of liquidity from capitals often far from, and blind to, the forests they are destroying.

Billions in green dollars end up on investors’ balance sheets, but there is a catch: billions of tonnes of carbon dioxide goes up in smoke from the trees burned in the process – and the risk to everyone is building up to a climate credit crisis.

Just one day of emissions from deforestation equates to 68 million people flying from London to New York.

Seven billion tonnes of carbon dioxide (CO2) annually places rainforests just second to energy as a source of global emissions and is more than the entire world’s transport sector put together.

And it is not just about carbon. The world’s rainforests are a giant “utility”, providing services we all use but do not pay for.

The Amazon releases 20 billion tonnes of water into the atmosphere each day. This air-conditions the atmosphere, waters agri-business and underpins energy security from hydro to biofuels across Latin America on a gigantic scale.

Were it possible to build a machine to do this, every day it would consume the energy equivalent to the world’s largest hydro dam running on full power for 135 years; and the Amazon does all this for free. Now that’s natural capital and we are eroding it fast.

Pavan Sukhdevs’ landmark report, The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity, published by the EU earlier this year, estimated the annual losses of natural capital to be, at the low end, equivalent to the value of the Indian stock market and, at the high end, the entire London stock market.

If what biodiversity does for us is so valuable, why is this happening? The answer is in part ignorance and, in part, that the global economy may no longer be fit for purpose.

The problem is that nature is priceless. What nature does for us is not valued economically. Whilst only financial and human capital drive human endeavour, and inputs from natural capital remain unrecognised, business proceeds on a false sense of security.

The economy, I believe, is at a truly historic tipping point where the global economy will rapidly need to incorporate the risks from the collision course that energy security, food security and environmental security are all on.

By 2050, to keep global temperatures from rising more that 2C and at the same time feed nine billion people, we cannot go on as we are.

Investing in natural capital may in time indeed turn out to be as safe as any other public utility but for that to happen we need the equivalent of an ecosystem services market with an environmental regulatory body that forces us to value the common goods that we continue to plunder at our peril.

Source: BBC News website

Date: 14/10/2008

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: