1. COILLTE’S PESTICIDE DEROGATION APPLICATION - CYPERMETHRIN

On the 6th September, the Woodland League, and many others, received an e-mail from Gus Hellier of Soil Association/Woodmark asking for submissions on a derogation application to allow Cypermethrin to be used in FSC certified forestry in Ireland. From January 2006, Cypermethrin has been classed by FSC as a highly hazardous chemical, and as such is banned in FSC certified forests. However, a region can obtain derogation from this banning if a reasonable argument can be made that the pesticide is necessary. The argument was made in the application (see below). We were all asked to make a submission on this.

For the derogation request to be successful (i.e. for Cypermethrin to be allowed in Ireland), there are four requirements. Firstly, that there is a demonstrated need for the pesticide, secondly that there are specified controls in place for the pesticide use, thirdly that there are programmes to identify alternatives, and finally and most importantly that there is general social and environmental support for the pesticide to be used. For the last one, a letter of support from the National Initiative (in Ireland’s case, the National Initiative is IFCI) is generally considered enough evidence that there is general social and environmental support for the pesticide to be used.

However, according to Gus Hellier, IFCI gave Soil Association/Woodmark the responsibility of carrying out the consultation in Ireland on the derogation application. Thus, we received this e-mail from Gus Hellier, with an attached questionnaire (see below).

Initially, it wasn’t clear as to whether the application for the use of Cypermethrin was made by Coillte, or one of the other two FSC certified forestry operations in Ireland. However, in an e-mail on the 11th September, Gus Hellier confirmed that it was Coillte that had made the application.

The Woodland League have also noted that there are several inaccuracies and incomplete comments in the application. In the application it is stated that there is “an accredited or preliminarily accredited FSC Forest Stewardship Standard applicable to the territory concerned”. However, this is not the case. The current FSC standard for Ireland is the second draft standard – and for many reasons this is neither accredited not preliminarily accredited by FSC International.

It is also required that in the application, programmes to identify alternatives to pesticide use have to be described. This application fails to do that – it states some organisations that are carrying out research, but does not describe what this research is or any outcomes of the research.

It is our hope that everybody reading this will respond in the negative to the derogation application – i.e. that everybody will refuse to allow Cypermethrin to be used in Irish forestry. Below is a submission on the derogation written on behalf of People Against Pesticides. People Against Pesticides have given permission for people to use any/all information contained in their submission. Also included below are several other submissions that have been made by organisations and individuals.

It is our understanding that the closing date for submissions is the 6th of October, though we are awaiting confirmation on this.

The person in FSC International that will be reviewing the derogation is Frank Katto. We suggest that in making a submission to Gus Hellier (ghellier@aoilassociation.org), you also copy Frank Katto (f.katto@fsc.org) in on the submission. A questionnaire that was sent by Gus Hellier is included below.

Please respond and stop this chemical from being used in Irish forestry.


==========================================================

1(a). DEROGATION APPLICATION BY COILLTE

Below is the application for derogation to use Cypermethrin, requested by Coillte and made by Soil Association/Woodmark. This is due to be sent to FSC international along with the submissions that are made. It is therefore very important that we get as many submissions made as possible.

Formatting has been altered to suit the newsletter.

FSC-TPL-01-002 Application for a derogation to use a highly hazardous pesticide

Name and contact details of certification body requesting derogation:
Woodmark
Soil Association
Bristol House, 40-56 Victoria St
Bristol BS1 6BY, UK
T: 00 44 (0) 117 914 2435
F: 00 44 (0) 117 314 5001
W: www.soilassociation.org/forestry

Active ingredient for which derogation requested:
Cypermethrin

Geographical scope of requested derogation:
Republic of Ireland

Is there an accredited or preliminarily accredited FSC Forest Stewardship Standard applicable to the territory concerned?
Yes

Requested time period for derogation:
(nb Derogations shall normally be issued for a five-year period. There will be a presumption against renewal of a derogation after the expiry of the five-year period).
5 years

1. Demonstrated need
Need may be demonstrated where:
- The pesticide is used for protecting native species and forests against damage caused by introduced species or for protecting human health against dangerous diseases, OR
- Use of the pesticide is obligatory under national laws or regulations, OR
- Use of the pesticide is the only economically, environmentally, socially and technically feasible way of controlling specific organisms which are causing severe damage in natural forests or plantations in the specified country (as indicated by consideration, assessments and preferably field-trials of alternative non-chemical or less toxic pest-management methods)

Explain how the proposed use complies with the specified criteria for need, including the consideration of alternatives which do not require the use of pesticides on the FSC list of ‘highly hazardous pesticides’:
The large pine weevil can be expected to infest most, if not all, conifer restocking sites. Delaying restocking until the insect population has subsided leads to excessive competing vegetation cover.
While research is in progress both here (Maynooth College, NUI) and in co-operation with the Forestry Commission in the UK through an Interreg Wales project on natural enemies, no such pest management option has yet emerged for operational use.
The identification of candidate insecticides, their authorisation by the Regulatory Authority and their subsequent development into operational use are long and arduous processes. Once an insecticide is adopted, stability in its use is essential to ensuring safe use and confidence in the product.

2. Specified controls to mitigate the hazard
The derogation shall specify the controls that will be implemented to mitigate the hazard associated with the use of the pesticide, for example restrictions related to weather conditions, soil types, application method, water courses, etc..
If the specified formulation is considered to reduce the level of hazard then the information on which this claim is based shall be presented, and the applicant shall provide credible independent, third party support for the claimed reduction of hazard.

Specify the controls that will be implemented to mitigate the hazard:
First here are the controls placed by the Regulatory Authority to ensure operator and environmental safety. Secondly, hazard is reduced through the use of dipping; spray application through mechanical planters at time of planting; and, standard operating procedures for directed manual spraying. In addition, protocols are in place for the protection of the public.

3. Programme to identify alternatives
The application shall describe the programme(s) which are in place in the territory concerned or which will be put in place during the period over which the derogation will be applicable, designed to identify alternative pest control methods which do not use highly hazardous pesticides.

Describe the programme(s) that are in place to identify alternatives:
Research is in progress both here (Maynooth College, NUI) and in co-operation with the Forestry Commission in the UK through an Interreg Wales project on natural enemies.

4. Stakeholder support
All applications for derogations shall include evidence that the application is supported by social, environmental and economic stakeholders in the best interests of promoting FSC’s goals in the territory concerned. It is the responsibility of the applicant to present this evidence in support of their application (see summary of procedures in Section 8, below).
The level of stakeholder support required will be evaluated taking account of the geographical scope of the derogation, the justification of need, and other factors include in the application such as the strength of the programme to identify alternatives, and the level of controls to mitigate the identified hazards.
A written letter of support by the Board of Directors of the FSC National Initiative for the territory concerned shall normally be considered sufficient evidence of national stakeholder support for the application.

Describe the consultation that has taken place and summarise the results:
[WLL note: consultation is ongoing]

Contingency plan to eliminate use of the pesticide during the derogation period
Derogations shall normally be issued for a five-year period. There is a presumption against renewal at the end of this five-year period unless it can be clearly demonstrated that the programme to identify alternatives has been fully implemented but has failed to identify an acceptable alternative in the available time.
Forest managers seeking certification under an approved derogation should therefore ensure that they have a contingency plan in place to eliminate use of the pesticide prior to the end of the derogation period. If a derogation is not renewed, the continued use of a highly hazardous pesticide after the expiry of the derogation would be considered a major non-compliance and would lead to the withdrawal of the certificate.
As a condition of use of a derogated pesticide, forest managers shall record quantitative and qualitative information about their use of such a pesticide, and this information shall be included in the certification body’s evaluation reports and in all subsequent surveillance reports.
Compliance with these requirements would need to be demonstrated by an applicant for certification at the Forest Management Unit (FMU) level and be verified by the certification body prior to the issue of a certificate. However, this evaluation is independent of the decision to issue a derogation for use of a pesticide over a geographical area.


==========================================================

1(b). QUESTIONNAIRE TO BE COMPLETED FOR SUBMISSION ON THE DEROGATION

CHEMICAL DEROGATION APPLICATION CONSULTATION RESPONSE FORM

PLEASE COMPLETE ALL SECTIONS AND USE ADDITIONAL SHEETS IF NEEDED

Chemical derogation application consultation response form for:
Republic of Ireland , 2006

Please return this form to Gus Hellier at:
Soil Association Woodmark, Bristol House, 40-56 Victoria Street, Bristol BS1 6BY. UK
Email:ghellier@soilassociation.org Fax: 0044 117 925 2504

Your Name:
Organisation/Affiliation:
Contact Details:

Chemical Name: Cypermethrin
Do you agree with the derogation: Yes/No
If no please explain why:


==========================================================

1(c). PEOPLE AGAINST PESTICIDE SUBMISSION

Your Name: Mr. Ciarán Hughes
Organisation/ Affliation: People Against Pesticides
Contact details: Caherawoneen, Kinvara, Co. Galway, IRELAND ciaran_hughes@yahoo.co.uk

Chemical Name: Cypermethrin
Do you agree with the derogation application?No
If no please explain why: Please see enclosed information

Gus Hellier, A Chara,

I am responding on behalf of People against Pesticides, and Irish NGO and the only pesticide action group in Ireland. PaP has been involved in the FSC process in Ireland since its inception.

I am going to divide my response into two sections, the first dealing with Cypermethrin as a chemical, the second dealing with the application for derogation.

Coillte Teoranta own over 99% of the certified forests in Ireland. It is therefore reasonable to assume that the derogation will benefit Coillte more than any other forestry company based in Ireland. However, the points made below, while they may directly refer to Coillte, also apply to all other certified forests in Ireland.

1. PaP wishes to make the following observations on the pesticide Cypermethrin:
1. Cypermethrin is highly toxic to fish and water insects ciaran_hughes@yahoo.co.uk. Ireland is already in court over water pollution relating to forestry, most notably in relation to the Freshwater Pearl Mussel [2-5]. There is a partial moratorium on Coillte’s felling policies in place in Counties Donegal, Galway and Mayo because of this. Allowing the use of further chemicals that damage aquatic life will exacerbate the problems that already exist with forestry operations damaging waterways.
2. The median lethal concentration of Cypermethrin for most fish is less than 5 parts-per-billion, and can have serious sub-lethal effects on fish at just 0.5 parts-per-billion 2006-03-03 08:33:34 (i.e. the LC50 of Cypermethrin is 8.3 μg/l. Water insects are affected/killed at similar concentrations. Thus, by FSC standards (FSC-GUI-30-001), Cypermethrin has “Acute toxicity to aquatic organisms”.
3. Cypermethrin is a broad-spectrum insecticide. Use of Cypermethrin will cause damage to insect life outside its intended target, which alone is the large pine weevil.
4. The fact that Cypermethrin is highly toxic to fish and other aquatic organisms, and that a large percentage of Coillte Teoranta’s forest estate is on wetlands which drain into streams, rivers and lakes, means that the effects of the pesticide application will be apparent beyond its intended use.
5. Cypermethrin is also highly toxic to bees ciaran_hughes@yahoo.co.uk. The bee population in Ireland is already in serious decline, as reported in 7d848c380f082c9fec60aedb3f17829e. By granting permission to use Cypermethrin, the bee population will be further threatened, and, again, the effects of the pesticide application will be apparent beyond its intended use.
6. Cypermethrin is highly toxic to the earth worm, an essential creature for the stabilisation of soil quality 1, and, again, the effects of the pesticide application will be apparent beyond its intended use.
7. Cypermethrin also has negative impacts on plant life [11-15], which is surprising and a severe negative impact considering that it is an insecticide, thus further demonstrating that the use of Cypermethrin will have effects beyond its intended use, which is for the control of the large pine weevil.
8. Tests have shown that Cypermethrin damages genetic material in Rats [9, 10].
9. The US Environmental Protection Agency classifies Cypermethrin as a possible human carcinogen. Thus, by FSC standards (FSC-GUI-30-001), Cypermethrin has some carcinogenicity.
10. Resistance develops quickly in insects that are exposed to Cypermethrin [16-18]. It is intuitive that if the large pine weevil is exposed regularly to Cypermethrin, it will become immune.
11. The majority of pesticides that contain Cypermethrin also contain other substances that are often classed as “inert”, such as
o Crystalline silica (The International Agency for Research on Cancer has classified evidence about its ability to cause cancer as sufficient in animals and limited in humans.) [19]
o Ethylbenzene (causes throat irritation, eye irritation, damage to liver and kidneys, dizziness, and incoordination. In laboratory tests, exposure to ethylbenzene has caused foetal resorption, retardation of foetal skeletal development, and extra ribs in foetuses.) [20]
o Xylenes (solvent that cause nose, throat, and eye irritation, labored breathing, lung inflammation, nausea, vomiting, mild liver toxicity, impaired short-term memory, and hearing loss in exposed humans and/or laboratory animals. In laboratory tests, xylene exposure has also caused reduced fertility, increased number of fetal resorptions, increased incidence of cleft palate, and decreased fetal weight. Xylene inhalation has been associated with an increased frequency of leukemia in solvent-exposed workers. It may be a cocarcinogen; exposure to xylenes enhanced the number of skin cancers caused by other carcinogens. It has the potential for bioaccumulation in human fat tissue.) [21]
o Trimethylbenzenes (highly volatile solvents that cause skin and eye irritation, nervousness, tension, bronchitis, disruptions of blood clotting, headaches, fatigue, dizziness, and loss of consciousness.) [22]

2. PaP wishes to make the following observation on the application to use the pesticide:
1. It is claimed that there is an “accredited or preliminarily accredited FSC Forest Stewardship Standard applicable to the territory concerned”. This is not the case. The current draft in Ireland is IFCI Draft Number 2, and this is not accredited by FSC International. Therefore the application should be invalid.
2. The protocols for the protection of the public are not outlined in the application. Therefore the application should be invalid.
3. A description of the programmes in place for researching alternatives is required. However, the application states that “‘Research is in progress both here (Maynooth College, NUI) and in co-operation with the Forestry Commission in the UK through an Interreg Wales project on natural enemies”. This does not describe what the research is. Therefore the application should be invalid.
4. The use of pesticide in Coillte’s monocultures can not be considered last resort. The use of monoculture conifer plantations leaves the trees prone to infection by disease and pest by accelerating the spread of the disease/pest. If Coillte increased their native mixed planting, it would reduce the risk from infection by disease/pest, and thus reduce the need for pesticide application.
5. It is stated that “hazard is reduced through the use of dipping”. However, the dipping method has caused controversy and conflicts with the Services, Industrial, Professional and Technical Union (SIPTU) who represented over 450 Coillte workers. SIPTU claimed that this form of treatment poses significant health and safety concerns [24, 25].
6. The application states that the need for pesticide usage is demonstrated where “Use of the pesticide is the only economically, environmentally, socially and technically feasible way of controlling specific organisms which are causing severe damage in natural forests or plantations in the specified country (as indicated by consideration, assessments and preferably field-trials of alternative non-chemical or less toxic pest-management methods)”. The applicant states that “The large pine weevil can be expected to infest most, if not all, conifer restocking sites. Delaying restocking until the insect population has subsided leads to excessive competing vegetation cover”. The logic that pesticide application is the only option is not sound. The clearing of the site from vegetation prior to planting is an alternative, and the use of native trees on the right sites would be considered an alternative.

Therefore, it should be obvious to the Soil Association and FSC that
1. The demonstrated need for the use of Cypermethrin is based on the massive overuse of foreign exotic conifer plantations in Ireland. Additionally, the demonstrated need states that competing vegetation is a problem – we have given one alternative. It also fails to demonstrate the need for the use of the ‘highly toxic’ pesticide Cypermethrin specifically.
2. The specified controls for the pesticide application are in question, and have led to a dispute between the trade union SIPTU and Coillte Teoranta. The application does not identify controls that are in place to mitigate the environmental and health hazard associated with the chemical pesticide usage.
3. The application states that there are programmes in place to identify alternatives. However, the very practical alternatives such as manual/mechanical clearing and increasing the native planting rate have apparently been ignored.
4. It has to be noted that “A written letter of support by the Board of Directors of the FSC National Initiative for the territory concerned will normally be considered sufficient evidence of national stakeholder support for the application” will not be sufficient in the case of Ireland. There are only three directors representing a two environmental NGOs, An Taisce and Friends of the irish Environment, a single self-title “State Environmental NGO” on the Social Chamber, the Woodlands of Ireland, and Coillte Teoranta on the Economic Chamber. A letter from these directors should not be considered “sufficient evidence of national stakeholder support for the application”. Additionally, a letter from the whole steering committee should also not be considered “sufficient evidence of national stakeholder support for the application”. On the Steering Committee, only three NGOs are represented on the Environmental Chamber – An Taisce, VOICE and FIE. Only one is represented on the Social Chamber – Woodlands of Ireland.

Considering the above 21 points, People against Pesticides vehemently oppose the derogation to allow the use of Cypermethrin in certified Irish Forestry.

Is mise le meas

Ciarán Hughes
People against Pesticides

References:

1. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Cypermethrin Fact Sheet, 1989.
2. Case C-392/96, Commission of the European Communities v. Ireland (1999)
http://curia.europa.eu/jurisp/cgi-bin/form.pl?lang=en&Submit=Submit&alldocs=alldocs&docj=docj&docop=docop&docor=docor&docjo=docjo&numaff=C-392%2F96&datefs=&datefe=&nomusuel=&domaine=&mots=&resmax=100
3. Case C-418/04, Commission of the European Communities v. Ireland (Pending)
http://curia.europa.eu/jurisp/cgi-bin/form.pl?lang=en&Submit=Submit&alldocs=alldocs&docj=docj&docop=docop&docor=docor&docjo=docjo&numaff=C-418%2F04&datefs=&datefe=&nomusuel=&domaine=&mots=&resmax=100
4. Case C-282/02, Commission of the European Communities v. Ireland (2005)
http://curia.europa.eu/jurisp/cgi-bin/form.pl?lang=en&Submit=Submit&alldocs=alldocs&docj=docj&docop=docop&docor=docor&docjo=docjo&numaff=C-282%2F02&datefs=&datefe=&nomusuel=&domaine=&mots=&resmax=100
5. Communication to author from Liam Cashman, European Commissioner, July 20 ‘06
6. World Health Organization (WHO). 1989. Cypermethrin. Environmental Health Criteria 82. Geneva, Switzerland: United Nations Environment Programme, International Labor Organization, and WHO.
7. The Irish Examiner, August 16 ’06, Declining bee population will mean changes to countryside
8. Roberts, B.L. and H.W. Dorough. 1984. Relative toxicities of chemicals to the earthworm Eisenia foetida. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 3:67-78.
9. Amer, S.M., et al. 1993. Induction of chromosomal aberrations and sister chromatid exchange in vivo and in vitro by the insecticide cypermethrin. J. Appl. Toxicol. 13:341-345.
10. Bhunya, S.P. and Pati, P.C. 1988. Genotoxic effects of a synthetic pyrethroid Insecticide, Cypermethrin, in mice in vivo. Toxicol. Lett. 41:223-230.
11. Megharaj, M., et al. 1987. Influence of cypermethrin and fenvalerate on a green algae and three cyanobacteria isolated from soil. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Safety 14:142-146.
12. Tu, C.M. 1983. Effects of pyrethroid insecticide seed treatments on Rhizobium japonicum and its symbiotic relationship with, and growth of soybean. J. Environ. Sci. Health B18:369-378.
13. Tu, C.M. 1991. Effect of some technical and formulated insecticides on microbial activities in soil. J. Environ. Sci. Health B26:557-573.
14. Kara, M., et al. 1994. Cytogenetic effects of the insecticide cypermethrin on the root meristems of Allium cepa L. Turk. J. Biol. 18:323-331.
15. Atale, A.S., et al. 1993. Mitodepressive and chromotoxic effects of some agrochemicals on chili. J. Maharashtra Agric. Univ. 18:30-31.
16. Yu, S.J. 1991. Insecticide resistance in the fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda (J.E. Smith). Pest. Biochem. Physiol. 39:84-91.
17. Kerns, D.L. and M.J. Gaylor. 1992. Insecticide resistance in field populations of the cotton aphid (Homoptera: Aphididae). J. Econ. Entomol. 85:1- 8.
18. Martinez-Cabrillo, J.L., et al. 1991. Responses of populations of the tobacco budworm (Lepidopterea: Noctuidae) from northwest Mexico to pyrethroids. J. Econ. Entomol. 84:363-366.
19. U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services. Public Health Service. 1991. Sixth annual report on carcinogens. Summary. Research Triangle Park: National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences.
20. U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services. Public Health Service. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. 1990. Toxicological profile for ethylbenzene. (November.)
21. U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services. Public Health Service. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. 1993. Toxicological profile for xylenes. (October.)
22. Sittig, M. 1991. Handbook of toxic and hazardous chemicals and carcinogens. 3rd edition. Vol. 2. Park Ridge, NJ: Noyes Publications. Pp. 1161-1162.
23. Coillte Social and Environmental Report, 2003. www.coillte.ie
24. Irish Times, April 13 ’06 – “Concerns over tree treatment”
http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/ireland/2006/0413/3231942574HM2BOLDS.html
25. Irish Independent, April 13 ’06 – “Workers bugged by insect strategy”
http://www.unison.ie/irish_independent/stories.php3?ca=9&si=1596854&issue_id=13913


==========================================================

1(d). OTHER SUBMISSIONS ALREADY MADE

SUBMISSION BY STEVEN HARRINGTON

Your Name: Steven Harrington
Organisation/Affliation: Private citizen; former member, FSC-US Board of Directors; Former member, FSC-US Technical Standards Committee; Coordinator, FSC-US Southwest Regional Standards Working Group
Contact details: Black Ball View, Knockroe East, Allihies, Beara, West Cork, Ireland 011-353-27-73136scribes1963@eircom.net

Chemical Name: cypermethrin
Do you agree with the derogation application? NO
If no please explain why:
A dominant system of even-aged exotic monoculture flies in the FSC of everything for which FSC has stood. The plantation system in Ireland is the worst choice for forestry from a long-term standpoint – the average person on the street despises the spruce plantations; environmentalists deplore their impact; and they are an insult to the art and science of forestry. The derogation is being requested in order to stuff the square peg of exotic even-aged monoculture into the round peg of FSC certification. The chemical is on the violations list for a reason – if the forestry system requires it to work, how can the system be said to be providing a benefit? It is providing harm in this case. The fact that the derogation is being requested 5 years on into Coillte’s certificate is simply unacceptable.



SUBMISSION BY CAVAN LEITRIM ENVIRONMENTAL AWARENESS NETWORK (CLEAN)

Your Name: Christine Raab-Heine
Organisation/ Affliation: CLEAN (Cavan Leitrim Environmental Awareness Network) Ltd
Contact details: Greagh House, Kilmore, Dowra, Co. Leitrim. chheine@iolfree.ie

Chemical Name: cypermethrin
Do you agree with the derogation application? No
If no please explain why:

Dear Gus,

We are an environmental group operating mainly, but not only in the North West of Ireland. On behalf of CLEAN I wish to forward you our response to this application.

We are first of all puzzled that this derogation is sought for the whole of Ireland just because Woodmark was asked by an undisclosed party that such derogation should be applied for.

We have a serious problem with this application. To our knowledge Cypermethrin is an insecticide that is highly toxic to fish, bees, earthworms and even plants, and was, as far as we are aware, therefore banned by the Irish department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, from use in fish farming. The fact that the chemical is on the FSC list for highly toxic chemicals would underline its potential dangerous effects. We also learned from our search that Cypermethrin has carcinogenic effects, and that Cypermethrin products generally contain further additives that are of concern themselves, as they can cause cancer, damages to foetuses and various diseases to humans on exposure to the chemical.

We do not consider that the application sufficiently proves that the chemical needs to be used in forestry operations in the Republic of Ireland. We are afraid that the chemical will easily reach and pollute watercourses, as Irish plantations are frequently and in an unsystematic and unwatched manner planted in wetland areas and are prone to pollute water courses. It has quite often happened for example that public or group water supplies were polluted after clear felling of plantations. The same effect can easily happen from dipping and planting trees with Cypermethrin, or from spraying existing trees. We do not know of any case where active warning has been given to the public or to local authorities, before such spraying was undertaken. Currently, some forestry operations posts a notice on the site where they intend to spray. However, waterways can often carry the chemicals far into people water supplies.

The fresh water pearl mussel, a rare and protected species in Ireland, is already endangered by forestry practices such as clear felling. It is this practice that is the reason behind this application, as the larvae of the pine weevil tends to develop especially on clear felled conifer sites. A reduction in exotic conifer plantation, as well as a reduction in clear felling of large blocks of stands with following quick reforestation of the same exotic species on unsuitable land, that is difficult to access, could decrease the occurrence of the pest. The fact that exotic conifers were planted en masse on unsuitable wetland sites certainly has contributed to the spread of the pine weevil.

A different approach to forestry in Ireland would to our understanding diminish the problem, i.e. planting of native and mixed forests, as well as a widespread adoption of silvicultural regimes other than exotic plantations and clear felling. We are commonly told that this cannot be achieved in the short term. However, from the draft IFCI standard in its present form we have to conclude that it is also no long-term goal. One could indeed start to ask whether the pine weevil is not in fact doing a good job.

Apart from this there are other possible approaches to fight the pine weevil, such as for example trapping, which were not mentioned in the application.

In conclusion, we are of the opinion that Irish forestry at the moment does not deserve FSC certification anyhow. To accept this derogation application to allow Cypermethrin would make it an even greater farce. We request that this application is refused.

Sincerely

Christine Raab-Heine
Director

P.S. Why is an explanation not also asked where the response is YES?


==========================================================

2. LETTER FOR THE DE-CERTIFICATION OF COILLTE

We the undersigned wish to register our concern over the certification of tree plantations in our country by the FSC, which has granted a green label to monoculture plantations that have proven to be socially and environmentally destructive.

We are aware that the FSC is carrying out a review of its plantation certification policy, and it is our hope that the result of this process will be an end to the certification of these types of plantations by the FSC in the future.

Nevertheless, the fact remains that the FSC has already certified large areas of monoculture tree plantations in our country, and we believe that their certification should be re-assessed as part of the current review process in order to determine whether they deserve to keep the FSC label.

There are well-documented cases of plantations in our country that never should have received this label and clearly merit de-certification.

As proof that the current review process is genuinely aimed at a profound change in plantation policy, we are calling for the immediate de-certification of the plantations that most blatantly violate the FSC's mission and the re-evaluation of all other certified plantations in the country.

We therefore demand the immediate de-certification of the plantations owned by Coillte.

Sincerely,

Cavan-Leitrim Environmental Awareness Network, Ireland
Doolough Protection Group, Ireland
People Against Pesticides, Ireland
Friends of the Irish Environment, Ireland
GM-Free Ireland Network, Ireland
People Before Profit, Ireland
Save Saleen Wood Campaign, Ireland
Shell to Sea, Ireland
The Davitt League, Ireland
Woodland League, Ireland


==========================================================

3. ORGANISATIONS FROM 8 COUNTRIES DEMAND THE FSC TO WITHDRAW CERTIFICATES

PRESS RELEASE

September 1, 2006

Subject: Organizations from 8 countries demand the FSC to withdraw certificates

Organizations from eight countries demand the FSC to withdraw its “green label” to several plantation companies

Organizations from eight different countries are requesting the Forest Stewardship Council –a labelling scheme that certifies good forest management practices- to withdraw the FSC certificate awarded to a number of companies in Brazil, Colombia, Chile, Ecuador, Ireland, South Africa, Spain and Uruguay. The challenged certifications in all cases involve large-scale tree plantations which the organizations point out violate the FSC’s mandate of promoting “environmentally appropriate, socially beneficial, and economically viable management of the world's forests.”

“None of the South African plantations should have been certified by the FSC, firstly because plantations are not forests and secondly because of the serious negative social and environmental impacts they produce,” says Wally Menne, a member of the Timberwatch Coalition. Philip Owen, from GeaSphere adds that “In South Africa, Industrial Timber Plantations impact most severely on the grassland biome, which is the most threatened vegetation type locally. Surely –he adds- the FSC should not be sanctioning this destruction of the natural environment.”

In the case of Ecuador Nathalia Bonilla –in charge of the certification issue at the local NGO Acción Ecológica- is demanding the de-certification of some 20,000 hectares of pine and eucalyptus plantations established in the Andes by the Dutch FACE Foundation, as well as over 8,000 hectares belonging to Ecuadorian company ENDESA/BOTROSA, which has a long history of social and environmental crimes. “We have documented in detail the negative impacts of these plantations on the livelihoods of the affected indigenous communities and on their environment; now the obvious step is for the FSC to withdraw the certificate to these plantations.”

Marcelo Calazans, a member of the Brazilian Alert Against the Green Desert Movement, which campaigns against tree monocultures described as “green deserts”, states that “although we oppose the certification of all large-scale tree monocultures, we are demanding the de-certification of only three companies: Suzano-Bahia Sul,Vallourec & Mannesmann and Plantar. The reason for this is that the social and environmental impacts of these three companies are so well documented that it is obvious that the FSC must immediately withdraw its certificate.”

The transnational Smurfit Kappa has a long history of conflicts with local communities in the Colombian region where it operates. “We cannot understand how this company can sell its products under the FSC logo”, says Diego Alejandro Cardona from CENSAT-Friends of the Earth Colombia. “The company’s operations are probably economically viable”, states Cardona, “but it no way can they be described as being environmentally appropriate or socially beneficial. We therefore demand the FSC to cease providing it credibility through the use of its label.”

In the case of Spain, local organizations have been demanding for over a year the cancellation of the FSC certification to plantations company NORFOR. Antón Masa, from the Association for the Defence of the Ria of Pontevedra explains that the reason for the urgent cancellation of the NORFOR certification “lies in the serious deficiencies found in the certification report and the clear inadequacy of NORFOR’s management system with respect to FSC principles and criteria.”

Several organizations in Ireland are demanding the withdrawal of the FSC certificate awarded to Coillte’s 438,000 hectares of plantations. Ciaran Hughes, from the Woodland League says: “NGOs in Ireland that have campaigned for the decertification of Coillte have been dealt a serious blow with Coillte’s recertification earlier this year. Coillte practices have always fallen far too short of the FSC principles and criteria.”

“In Chile there are serious cases of companies that should have never received the FSC logo and that deserve to be de-certified. Such are the cases of Forestal Monte Aguila, belonging to CMPC (Mininco) and Forestal Bio (Forestal Arauco), that are severely questioned and whose certification does not take into account their environmental impacts and the territorial conflicts with indigenous Mapuche communities”, states Alfredo Seguel, from the Agrupación Konapewman and member of the working groups of the Coordination of Mapuche Territorial Identities (CITEM).

As respects to Uruguay, local organizations are demanding the de-certification of two national (COFUSA and FYMNSA) and two foreign (Finnish COFOSA and Spanish EUFORES) plantation companies. Ricardo Carrere, the author of the report “Greenwash: Critical analysis of FSC certification of industrial tree monocultures in Uruguay”, stresses that “none of those plantations should have been certified” and that “by certifying large-scale tree monocultures such as these, the FSC is weakening local struggles against them.”

The organizations involved in this activity have sent letters to the FSC Board and to the members of the Plantations Review Working Group demanding the withdrawal of the FSC certificate to all the above mentioned companies, on the basis that none of them comply with the FSC mandate.

For interviews:

In Brazil:
Marcelo Calazans
Brazilian Alert Against the Green Desert Movement
marcelo.fase@terra.com.br
+55 273 223 7436

In Colombia
Diego Alejandro Cardona Calle
CENSAT Agua Viva
bosques@censat.org
+57 1 3377709

In Chile
Alfredo Seguel
Coordination of Mapuche Territorial Identities
alfredoseguel@gmail.com
+5645 213313

In Ecuador
Nathalia Bonilla
Acción Ecológica
cbosques@accionecologica.org
+593-22-547-516

In Ireland:
Ciaran Hughes
Woodland League
ciaran_hughes@yahoo.co.uk
+353-87-9652992

In South Africa:
Philip Owen
GeaSphere
owen@soft.co.za
Mobile: 0730980867

In Spain:
Benito Andrade
Asociación pola defensa da Ría
bandrade@mundo-r.com
+34 636281252

In Uruguay
Ricardo Carrere
World Rainforest Movement
wrm@wrm.org.uy
+5982 4132989


==========================================================

4. THE RESISTANCE CONTINUES OUT WEST; A ROUND UP OF NEWS FROM ROSSPORT SOLIDARITY CAMP

A round up of news from Rossport Solidarity Camp and the Shell to Sea campaign; re-routed pipelines, plans by Shell to restart work, a meaningless recommendations from a government appointed mediator, thirteen months of blocking Shell and counting, a gathering at the camp and a wee walk to Dublin...

Photos available athttp://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2006/08/348790.html

Shell intend to start work in September
Shell has announced that it intends to recommence works at the site of its proposed refinery at Bellanaboy, Erris Co Mayo this September. Work is scheduled to begin with the installation of Axonics water treatment systems. The proposed refinery site at Bellanaboy has been picketed for over thirteen months by local campaigners who have succeeded in stopping all work at the site since the Rossport five were imprisoned at the end of June 2005. Shell’s subcontractors have so far only succeeded in limited preparatory peat removal from the site, which is located on ex-Coillte (state forestry) land consisting of blanket bog. If built the proposed refinery would have a detrimental effect on the local environment and the community it sustains resulting in pollution of the currently clean air and water, negatively affecting health, livelihoods and wildlife. Local Shell to Sea campaigners and members of the solidarity camp vow to maintain the picket and to prevent any attempted work; there will never be a refinery at Bellanaboy!

Peter Cassell’s Report: avoiding the issues
Shell’s announcement came in the wake of the release of a report by Peter Cassell’s who was appointed by Minister Noel Dempsey to mediate between Shell and the Rossport five shortly after their release from prison last October. The report compiled at the request of Minister Dempsey after the collapse of mediation has been widely criticized as failing to address the key issues involved in the Corrib project and raised by Shell to Sea. It offered token recommendations, which served more to cloud the real issues than to deal with the glaring problems.

Re-routing the pipe?
The report’s main recommendation was the re-routing of the upstream pipeline to address the issues of proximity to housing. In a contrived attempt at reasonableness Shell announced that it now intends to re-route the contentious pipeline. The word ‘reroute’ however remains ambiguous. When pushed on Mid west radio station Shell deputy managing director Terry Nolan conceded that the upstream pipe might still could go through Rossport. Rerouting of the pipeline not only potentially moves the problem to another community but also fails to address the core demand of the campaign that is named Shell to Sea; namely that Shell processes the gas at sea.

Local development fund;
Among Cassell’s other recommendations was the establishment of a local development fund, the employment of people and purchase of services locally, local infrastructural enhancements, notably on roads. The suggestion of a ‘local development’ fund has been met with general contempt from local and national Shell to Sea organisers as representing little more than Shell throwing a few crumbs from the table. Shell and its consortium partners own 100% of our gas, they pay no royalties and the little tax (25%) can be written off against costs. One of the core demands of the campaign is the renegotiation of the ‘deal’ so that the gas benefits us instead of lining the pockets of a huge multinational corporation.

One of the most insulting and blatantly wrong parts of the report is the section where Cassells categorises the type of people in the local community. He asserts that he encountered three types of people in the area (i) those who support the project and have always done so, (ii) those who support the project but have genuine concerns, and finally (iii) those who are opposed to all development. The clear attempt to paint those who are fighting for the survival of their community as being opposed to development or as having concerns that are not genuine is contemptible. The portrayal of opponents of the current project as a vocal minority is also unfounded. Erris Shell to Sea recently conducted a door-to-door ‘canvas’ of over 2,500 homes in Erris handing out information on the project and its effects. The overwhelming response was one of support. Out of 2,500 homes approximately fifteen did not support the campaign. A poll conduced by a local newspaper last year found that 80% of those polled supported the demand of Shell to sea.

The Long Walk;
Local Shell to Sea campaigners, members of Rossport Solidarity Camp and supporters recently undertook an epic cross-country walk from outside Shell’s semi derelict compound in Rossport to Dublin city. Almost three hundred people took part in the walk along the way with eight people walking the whole way. The walk, which took just under two weeks saw campaigners walk over 300km stopping in towns along the way holding public information meetings, talking to people and handing out information about how Corrib affects us all. The walk ended in Dublin on Saturday 12th of August at the G.P.O. on O’Connell street. The overwhelming response encountered by walkers was one of support and solidarity.

Rossport Solidarity Camp August Bank Holiday Organising Weekend;
While some of us were tramping the roads to Dublin the Rossport Solidarity Camp hosted a weekend of organising on the August bank holiday weekend. The gathering followed on from our very successful one-year anniversary gathering on the June bank holiday. The gathering saw those interested in organising around social justice and environmental issues gather at the camp to help out with preparing the camp for winter and meetings about how to further the aims of the campaign, specifically raising the issue of the ownership and control of our natural resources. We are holding a building week from 18th –22nd of September. If you are interested in helping please get in touch. (rossportsolidaritycamp@gmail.com)

For more info see
www.shelltosea.com
www.indymedia.ie/mayo
www.struggle.ws/rsc


==========================================================

Continued athttp://www.woodlandleague.org/newsletter/index.php?itemid=57

Continued fromhttp://www.woodlandleague.org/newsletter/index.php?itemid=56

==========================================================

5(a). IN THE NEWS – Local

‘COMER DEMESNE PLANS SCUPPERED AFTER MAST GETS GREEN LIGHT
By Naoise O' Donovan Coogan

An Bord Pleanála has granted planning permission for the development of a 36 metre telecommunications mast in Castlecomer.
The controversial mast which drew much opposition from local residents' associations is to be located in the picturesque Demesne area in the Ardra townland on the outskirts of Castlecomer town.
Locals lodged several objections to the location of the mast in the Demesne area which has in recent years been developed as an amenity area with two lakes, fishing, walks and plans for much more. Kilkenny County Council granted permission for the mast twice in the past four years, however, An Bord Pleanála overturned the decision once but finally allowed it in recent weeks.
Ger Ferris of the Ardra Residents' Committee said that they were very disappointed at the news that the mast had been given the go-ahead as they had high hopes for the development of the area.
"Castlecomer Demesne Company along with the assistance of Kilkenny County Council has already carried out a lot of work in the Demesne park. People fish in the two lakes every day. The interpretative centre is in the construction phase, the locals walk there every day and the Estate Craft Yard is doing very well. We had hoped to do even more in the future with the area as we feel it has much more potential than is currently being utilised. We want this area to be an amenity for the entire southeast region. We have plans for canoeing on the lakes, orienteering along the tracks, absailing from the cliffs and mountain biking through the land. Some of these activities will now not be possible as the mast site is too close to the tracks for biking and orienteering and it would be too dangerous."
Permission was granted By An Bord Pleanála to O2 Communications for the mast following the appeal by the Ardra Residents’ Association who opposed the decision which was made on February, 28, 2006 by Kilkenny County Council. An Bord Pleanála stated that permission was granted following consideration of the national strategy regarding the improvement of mobile communication services in the area which are currently relatively poor in parts of Castlecomer.
An Bord Pleanála added that the location of the new mast was within an established forestry area and was removed from proposed public amenity facilities and that the mast would not seriously injure the amenities of the area and would not be prejudicial to public health.
A number of conditions were also outlined for the development of the structure. The Board said that the permission is only for a period of five years from the date of this order. The mast will be removed unless planning permission is granted for the retention of the mast after five years. The Board also required that the company reinstate the original site where the mast is located if the mast is to be removed in the future and a cash deposit was required as a bond of insurance that this work would be carried out should the mast not be reinstated in five years time.
Ger Ferris said that following the granting of planning permission, the group has sought clarification on conditions surrounding the ground level which is required to be 1.58 metres above sea level.
He said, "we're baffled as to why An Bord Pleanála have changed their minds this time round. The Council is also giving with one hand and taking with another as it is pumping money into this amenity area yet the potential of the area cannot be reached if this mast goes ahead. It simply defies logic and that is why we are seeking clarification."
Coillte are the owners of the land in the area and they have permitted 80 acres to be developed as an amenity area by the Castlecomer Demesne Company, however a further 120 acres remains in forestry. The residents' association is concerned that in the future many more masts will be required to cope with the new technology that is emerging daily and therefore the area will be seen as a 'good location' for even more of the same, dwarfing plans for the restoration of a beautiful amenity area.

© Kilkenny Advertiser, September 13 ‘06


==========================================================

5(b). IN THE NEWS – National

WEYERHAUSER PLANT FOR COILLTE

Caroline Madden
Coillte, the State-owned forestry company, announced yesterday that it had purchased the Weyerhaeuser Europe plant in Clonmel for an undisclosed sum.
Gerry Egan, company secretary with Coillte, said yesterday that the company did not expect any redundancies among the US group's 200-strong workforce to result from the takeover of the medium-density fibreboard (MDF) plant.
"We envisage that the business will be run as a going concern," he said. "We don't envisage any major changes."
The takeover will provide a very important platform for the development of Coillte, Mr Egan said. "There are two kinds of synergies. The first is because is using wood as its main raw material, and Coillte is the largest producer of wood in the State."
In addition, Coillte already owns a wood panel business, SmartPly, in Waterford, which it acquired from US company Louisiana Pacific in 2002. The Waterford plant manufactures oriented strand board (OSB). "We would see MDF and OSB as being very complementary products."
Mr Egan anticipates that the takeover will greatly strengthen Coillte's position in the wood panels market in general, and in the UK in particular.
"Coillte has already established a good position in the OSB market through SmartPly," he said, adding that the purchase "opens up all sort of interesting opportunities down the line".
The purchase is currently pending approval from the Competition Authority, which Mr Egan says could take between one to four months.
The first steps in the transaction were taken in November last year when Weyerhaeuser Europe's US-based parent company, Weyerhaeuser, announced its intention to exit the composite panel sector, and placed all seven of its manufacturing plants on the market.
At the time, chief executive Steven Rogel said: "We believe that the skilled employees at these highly competitive and efficient mills will provide greater value for a new owner who is more focused on this line of business products."
Weyerhaeuser Europe made an operating profit of €3.45 million in 2004 on sales of €74 million, mostly in the UK market.

© The Irish Times, August 22 ‘06



MUSSEL POWER LEAVES THE TREES STANDING
Enda Leahy

A TINY creature is about to cost the Irish forestry industry millions in lost revenue. The pearl mussel, which lives 120 years and is extremely sensitive to pollution, is set to change forever the way trees are grown and felled in parts of Ireland.
The difficulties for Coillte, the state forestry agency, began after phosphorous and nitrate silt leaked into the Owenriff river in Galway in May 2004, and caused an algae bloom that asphyxiated most of the mussels living downstream.
The bivalve is a protected species under European law, and Ireland has the largest remaining population.
Mary Coughlan, the minister for agriculture, imposed a moratorium on forestry activities in all pearl mussel areas last May, some 18 months after officials in the National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS) recognised the problem. Coillte can now neither continue fertilising the trees in these areas nor cut them down in an economically viable way. Gerry Egan, Coillte’s company secretary, said yesterday less than a quarter of the company’s forests, were affected. But internal documents and environmentalists suggest otherwise.
Aine O’Connor, an environmental officer at the NPWS, began an internal debate on the issue in an e-mail to her colleagues in October 2004, five months after the bloom emerged.
“I am very concerned that populations in other river catchments are at risk,” she wrote.
“Current evidence suggests that clear felling of conifer plantations in blanket bog and heath catchments lead to massive losses . . . I believe that all forestry activities in mussel catchments should be suspended.”
One of her colleagues, Noel Kirby, replied: “Having looked at the Owenriff situation it is my impression that we are sitting on fertiliser time bombs that are coming to the fore after 50-plus years of fertiliser usage for forestry.”
A spokesman for the Department of Agriculture said last week that clear felling had been prohibited in 25 river catchment areas and there was now a ban on new planting as well. Studies are being carried out to decide what kind of forestry might be more suitable in these areas.
The mussel is known to live in 25 rivers nationwide, including the Shannon, Suir, Barrow, Nore, Slaney, Bandon, both Blackwaters and Lough Corrib. The Department of Agriculture confirmed that if the mussel is discovered elsewhere, the ban will be extended to those rivers too. In the past the species has lived in most Irish waterways.
In another internal e-mail released to Friends of the Irish Environment under a European access to information law Pat Warner, a Forest Service inspector, warned the problem could be bigger than expected.
“Please be aware,” he wrote, “that unless are a lot more rare than I think, you are contemplating closing down a significant amount of the state’s afforestation programme, both private and public, if you ban fertilisers in whole catchments. You can’t grow commercial timber in uplands without fertiliser.”
Coillte’s forestry model, which involves regular clear felling of swathes of forest, is now known to acidify soil and dump huge amounts of phosphorous and nitrates into the ground and rivers.
Jim Ryan, an official at the NPWS, told his colleagues he was “stunned” at the amount of fertiliser used by Coillte and the Forest Service and referred to one study in the Cloosh forest in Galway where phosphorous levels in the water from fertilisation and clear felling were 40 times the accepted limit.
Coillte, established in 1989 with the principal remit of making a profit, has almost exclusively grown non-native coniferous trees in poor-quality peat uplands, the same areas susceptible to the chemical leaching that pollutes rivers and kills the pearl mussel.
Last year the European Environment Agency found that 83% of all forestry planted between 1990 and 2000, most of which is still waiting to be harvested and sold, was on peat. While Coillte and the government say the study is wrong, another analysis by University College Cork (UCC) found that at least 50% of forested land is planted on peat bogs.

© The Sunday Times, September 17 ‘05


==========================================================

5(c). IN THE NEWS – UK

THE RISE AND FALL OF BRITAIN’S INDUSTRIAL FOREST
Millions of trees are being felled and left to rot, in the biggest deliberate destruction of forest Britain has ever seen. So why are conservationists rejoicing?

By Michael McCarthy

Of all the ideas that are impossible to shift, one of the most tenacious is that planting trees is a Good Thing. The very act seems self-evidently benevolent. Trees provide shade and shelter, wood for building, homes for wildlife; they give us the oxygen we need to breathe, and they soak up the carbon dioxide that is causing the climate to change. We also like them a lot. Perhaps a major reason we are drawn to trees is the idea of their apotheosis, forest. In the human imagination a forest has long been a special place, mysterious and secret. In Britain our template is the ancient wildwood: great oaks towering over dappled light and shade where badgers play and deer graze. We cherish a forest as a world apart, where the riches of nature are especially concentrated.
Yet in the 20th century in Britain, a new and entirely alien type of forest was to be planted in the uplands, a forest which nobody loved and which many people eventually came to hate, yet which for 70 years carried all before it. It strode over the hills in knife-edged straight lines, ignoring the contours of the earth, wiping out the singularity and variation of the landscape with great regimented, geometrical blocks. The trees, all conifers, came from abroad. They were all identical, same type, same shape, same size, and they were squeezed together like passengers on the London Underground in the rush hour, packed so tightly that little light penetrated between them: there was no dappled shade, no wildflowers on the forest floor, just darkness and sterility. This dark green army marched on and on, decade after decade, and it was not until myriad special places had been lost under it and the area of Britain covered by trees had increased by 100% that at long last it went too far, and it met its Waterloo.
The story of the great 20th century conifer afforestation of Britain is rarely told, but it was one of the biggest changes ever to the look of our landscape. It was extraordinary for the way in which the process proceeded unquestioned for so long, and even more for the dramatic way in which it ended, with the bitterest battle over conservation Britain has ever seen. When it was done the country's main wildlife watchdog body had been dismembered in what many saw as an act of sheer political spite, and much wonderful wildlife habitat had been destroyed; but the new forestry had at last been tamed.
It came out of the Great War, and the critical need for wooden pit props to keep the coal mines going, at a time when Britain ran on coal. We could not produce enough of our own, and the German submarine blockade of 1917 very nearly choked off imports. Never again, said the Government when hostilities finished: we will create a strategic reserve of timber for pit props and other essential uses; and in 1919 the Forestry Commission was born. The new quango was to build up a major British timber resource as quickly and as cheaply as possible. It could not do this by renewing the native forest of oak and ash and all the other shady, whispering broadleaved trees that had been beloved for centuries. They grew far too slowly and irregularly. What was needed were trees that would grow fast and straight in poor soils, so the Commission turned to conifers. Britain's one native conifer suitable for commercial forestry, the Scots pine, was too slow-growing and dependent on dry earth. For the damp climate of the uplands, where most of the new afforestation was taking place, the Commission looked to the conifers of the northern Pacific coast of the USA: above all, the Sitka spruce.
The Sitka spruces and their fellows did indeed push up quick and straight, and they made possible a forestry of an entirely new sort, industrial in style and scale. It was anything but a recreation of the diverse natural woodland Britain had known before. Rather, it was intensive tree farming, using alien trees. Over the hills of England, Wales and Scotland the great austere blocks of huddled conifers began to spread, 150,000 hectares by 1939, and then at a gathering pace after the Second World War: 310,000 hectares in the Fifties, 365,000 hectares in the Sixties. No matter that nobody liked it. No matter that much of our ancient broadleaved woodland, its value unrecognised, was being cut down at the same time. No matter that sites of beauty and conservation value were being swamped. The dark monoculture advanced remorselessly, until by 1980 the woodland cover of Britain, which in 1919 had been the lowest of any major European country, at less than 5% of the land, had doubled to over two million hectares. And then it hit the Flow Country.
Of a11 the candidates for Britain's most extraordinary landscape, the Flow Country - the peatlands of Caithness and Sutherland in the far north of Scotland - must be near the top of the list. This is a region beyond the Highlands, both geographically and in spirit, a true wilderness: a vast open plain of quivering peat bog, dotted with thousands of dark pools (dubh lochans in Gaelic), whose nearest equivalent is the Arctic tundra. Stretching for miles in every direction, it seems empty for seven or eight months of each year, but in spring it explodes into vivid life: flowers cover the peatlands, and a great pulse of millions of hatching insects draws in the most remarkable upland birds in all of the British Isles.
Greenshanks, dunlins, golden plovers; black-throated and red-throated divers; scoters and skuas, eagles, harriers and falcons; curlews and snipe; oystercatchers and sandpipers; wigeon, wheatears and ring ouzels, with meadow pipits and skylarks in their thousands: a litany of rarity, beauty and diversity that is matched nowhere else. When the tide of Sitka spruce got to the top of Scotland, it ran smack into this amazing aggregation of birds, and started to destroy their moorland nesting sites.
It was not directly the Forestry Commission's doing. Private companies had come on the
Scene, attracted by the realisation that investors in forestry could claim not only planting grants but also substantial tax reliefs, at a time when personal tax levels much higher than now. These forestry management companies bought and planted forest blocks on behalf of investors never saw the trees, but took advantage of the reliefs. One of them, Fountain Forestry based in Perth, realised in the late Seventies that it could buy up large parts of the Flow Country very cheaply - as the land was no good for agriculture - and turn it forest. No trees grow naturally on the Flows: in the nutrient-poor waterlogged peat, tree roots cannot establish themselves. But advances in technology changed things. Foresters had discovered if you ploughed the peat deeply - and new wide-tracked ploughs made this possible - you could, with liberal use of fertiliser, get trees established in the plough "throw", the peat thrown up to the side of the furrow, and you could then help them by draining the peat with a network of ditches.
Fountain Forestry turned out to be a particularly assertive company. Between 1979 and 1985 it bought and planted, mainly with Sitka spruce, no less than 40,000 hectares of prime peatland. The effect on the breeding birds was immediate: their moorland nest sites started going under the plough. When the Royal Society the Protection of Birds (RSPB) eventually raised the alarm conservationists were outraged, and battle began.
It was an acrimonious public fight, enlivened by the revelation that some of Fountain Forestry's wealthy tax-break clients were famous names - Terry Wogan, Cliff Richard, Phil Collins. It was intensified by the feeling of Scottish politicians that this was an inference by English busybodies in Scottish affairs. That came a head in 1987 when the Nature Conservancy Council (NCC), UK-wide wildlife watchdog, published a report entitled Birds, Bogs and Forestry, which criticised the foresters in unusually outspoken terms (and was launched in London rather than Edinburgh). The Scottish establishment was furious and prevailed .)n the Government in 1989 to break up the NCC, so Scotland could get a wildlife agency a11 its own. But by then the battle had been won. The Government had realised that a tax break for rich investors which did damage to wildlife was a classic example of perverse subsidy, and terrible publicity. In his 1988 budget Nigel Lawson scrapped the forestry tax reliefs. That halted the planting. The Forestry Commission, to its credit, began to see that conservation could no longer be sidelined, and turned to a much broader approach which respected Britain's landscape and native species.
But what of the Flow Country itself, where the issue was decided? Journey north, far past Inverness, until you come to Forsinard with its tiny railway station, then venture boldly off the road: you will see one of the strangest sights of your life. Around you are millions of chopped-down young trees, lying where they have fallen in the long straight plough furrows which form vast grids across the naked land, This is not a harvesting, as the trees are far too immature to harvest: this is destruction, probably the biggest deliberate destruction of trees Britain has ever seen. They are mostly Sitka spruces, Christmas-tree size or a bit bigger. Now their greenness has all gone and they are fusing into each other as a knee-high thick mix of dead branches and needles and thin bony trunks which has a name of its own ("brash") and covers the landscape in a great sad ash-grey littering.
"It's not pretty," murmurs Norrie Russell, who has supervised the destruction. "You would never call it pretty." But it is strangely moving. The RSPB is trying to put things right. Helped by EU money, in a partnership that involves Scottish Natural Heritage, the wildflower charity Plantlife, and yes, the Forestry Commission, it has bought and is removing more than 2,000 hectares of Fountain Forestry's unhappy plantings and trying to restore the underlying peat bog to what it was. More than four million trees have come down, but the restoration isn't easy or quick. Experiments showed that the best way of removing the spruces was to fell them into the plough furrows and let them rot down (the wood has no commercial value). But the process will take decades. "How long will it take till it's an active bog?" muses Norrie, the RSPB's Forsinard site manager. "It could take 30 to 100 years. It's quite hard to predict. But as long as the climate remains the same, this landscape wants to be covered in an open bog, it doesn't want to be a forest. It will happen."
We walk out on to the still untouched peatlands, where the flowers are starting to bloom: the cottongrass, the sundew, the bog asphodel. The gaze stretches away unimpeded to the far horizons, and suddenly a greenshank takes flight, the elegant, nervy wader, seeming to embody in its melancholy call the very essence of wildness. Planting trees is only a Good Thing, sometimes.

© The Independent, June 2006


==========================================================

6. WOODLAND LEAGUE CONTACT DETAILS

www.woodlandleague.org

Andrew St. Ledger, PRO,
+353-(0)87-9933157

Brendan Kelly, Liaison Officer,
+353-(0)91-687778 (evenings)
+353-(0)86-1529176 (mobile)
brendankellywoodlawn@yahoo.ie

Ciarán Hughes, Secretary,
The Woodland League,
c/o Caherawoneen, Kinvara, Co. Galway, .
+353-(0)87-9652992
info@woodlandleague.org


==========================================================

1. UMLAZI: CONSERVATION CONVERSATION

Having completed Tangencya 1 in 2005, whereby I worked with six Zulu wood carvers on a cooperative sculpture, whose aim was to promote indigenous African tree appreciation and link the material (wood) back to the living tree, I was then invited back this year to continue the conservation theme. 

This time my brief was to establish an indigenous tree nursery in a township.  After much communication via email, including some changes, the plan evolved to include a medicinal plant nursery alongside the trees, with a view to exploring assisting the HIV problem via natural medicines, and the potential of creating an income for the community.  My visit coincided with a wonderful three day course at Silverglen indigenous plant and tree nursery, on establishing a medicinal plant nursery for Sangoma’s (traditional healers).  On arrival at Silverglen, the teacher, Petrus Mongameli, was a little bit surprised to see a white Irishman interested in learning with the Sangoma’s. However, I settled in very quickly and thoroughly enjoyed the opportunity to access very important knowledge as well as gain an unique insight into a very special part of Zulu culture, the tradition of healing through the muti plants coupled to invoking the spirits of the ancestor’s, whom the Zulu culture, like all earth based indigenous cultures, see the spirit world as very real, in the same way as time was always seen, compared to a river flowing with the past, present and future, always accessible.

 We learned the history of Silverglen, now a 300 hectare nature reserve where all plants and trees are grown from seed collected within the reserve.  This is a very valuable seed bank in terms of recreating biodiversity for conservation and treestoration projects.  This seed energy is true wealth as the seeds hold the information in their DNA which allows us to restore degraded landscapes utilising the complexity of resources provided for, by the indigenous trees and plants.

 Silverglen emphasized how important the native trees and plants are, and the inter relationships that exists between plants, animals, fungi, insects etc.etc.etc. within ecosystems.  This tied in nicely with my message that the native woodland of any place is the most important land-based habitat for all wildlife and biodiversity.

 The Convention on Biodiversity (1993) which followed on the Rio de Janeiro (1992) where Agenda 21 (what we all must do to survive the 21st Century) was agreed by 172 nations, including .  This Convention on Biodiversity, which has been the major driving force in the new international attitude to nature conservation, was created to maintain and restore the world’s native biodiversity which is disappearing at an alarming and accelerating rate.  Sustainability is defined in the Convention as whatever does not lead to the long-term decline of native bioderversity.  The Convention states: “Noting further that the fundamental requirement for the conservation of biological diversity is the in situ (place of origin) conservation of ecosystems and natural habitats and the maintenance and recovery of viable populations of species in their natural surroundings”. The Convention then defines sustainable use as “the use of components of biological diversity in a way and at a rate that does not lead to the long-term decline of biodiversity”.  Thus the needs in the definition of sustainability as “development which meets the needs of today’s generation without compromising the needs of future generations” refers to their needs in relation to the conservation of native biodiversity. Without this understanding, the definition is so vague as to render almost any development “sustainable”.  At all times it is clear that native biodiversity is the overwhelming concern and forms the basis of the idea of sustainability.  Should anyone have any doubts about this, the Convention is on the Internet, where these points are written in black and white. 

 The Convention of biological diversity draws heavily from the absolute primordial law which nature has laid down – the law of the interdependence of all physical existences.  Nature never separates her animal and vegetable world:  in their lives, as in their decay and deaths, beasts and plants are absolutely interlocked.  She does not even recognise monoculture (growing of single species as a crop) in her vegetable kingdom.  Her sowings and harvestings are mixed and intermingled to the last degree, the prairie, the forest, the moor, the marsh, the river, the lake, the ocean include in their several ways an interweaving of existences which is a dramatic lesson. 

 The garden project at Umlazi draws on these understandings, using an idea called forest gardening, which is a copy of nature’s common sense approach to gardening which included using useful trees, shrubs i.e. medicinal and fruiting, with vegetables mixed in with medicinal plants, some of which we planted on the edge of the vegetable plot to ward off insects, snails etc.  This is called companion planting, which eliminates the need for pesticides etc.  Wild garlic is one such native plant who’s pungent odour wards off many pests that can otherwise cause a lot of damage in the garden.

 We also established two mounded soil circles in which we planted many medicinal plants in a spiral fashion, which maximises the light, nutrients etc. in a small space, allowing for greater yields.

 We emphasized the importance of good compost rich with humus (living material, earthworms, insects, fungi) to make the soil more fertile.  In soils rich in humus the roots of the crop and the particles of the soil come into contact in two ways, firstly by means of the soil solution which contains, among other things, small quantities of nitrates, phosphates and potash salts.  Secondly, by means of the mycorrhizal (fungi/mushrooms) association:  this is a partnership between the active cells of the roots with the threads of fungal matter, this forms a living bridge between the plant and the humus in the soil.  The roots and fungus grow together. 

 The relationship is one of symbiosis, the precise details are yet to be investigated.  A fungus living on the humus (living material) in the soil, invades the cells of the active part of the roots and lives there, finally being itself digested by the plant.  The fungus boosts the plant’s immune system as they contain natural antibiotics, and in turn feeds on sugars produced by the plant.  The crop grows by means of the soil solution and the digestion products produced by the fungus.  It is only when the plant is nourished in this double fashion that we get disease resistance and high quality in our crops, our animals and ultimately ourselves.  This is the basis of organic farming/growing.

 At the start of the project I met up with Leishle Mbokazi who runs an NGO called “Vuka” who are actively working on environment projects in the community.  Leishle agreed to help and partner this garden project which was a great help.  I also contacted Wally Menne whom I already knew from my forestry work in , we are campaigning to change forest policy away from monoculture, exotic plantations, back to continuous cover, multi-use, sustainable native forestry.  Wally is active here in the same area and shares the same percentage of indigenous forest cover as , a measly 1%.  Wally was also very helpful as he runs an indigenous plant nursery in Durban and has a vast knowledge and experience in this area.  Wally and Leishle agreed to network to support the Umlazi garden when I’m gone, along with my assistant, Xolani Qwabe, who was my interpreter at the Silverglen course. He has taken a passionate interest in the medicinal plants and trees.  As an art student he is going to write his thesis on traditional medicine, the ancestors and link it to his art world, which is extremely welcome as he can promote this information in a fresh and exciting way to a whole new audience.  Xolani will also establish his own nursery in a place where his late father grew these plants before.  This is good news as he is repairing the links in the chain of traditional knowledge in this very positive way.  I could not have asked for a better assistant and I thank his lecturer for the choice, Themba Shibase. 

 Xolani also attended the Silverglen course as my interpreter.  Therefore, he too gained an insight into growing the muti plants from seeds and cuttings.  We were shown the remarkable fertility of these plants, whereby one can reproduce the whole plant from stem, tissue, leaf and wood cuttings.  This shows Sangomas that they do not need to take the whole plant, that the same plant can continue to supply new plants indefinitely without destroying the mother plant (source).  We learned to grow from seed also. 

 After a mix of practical and theoretic learning, the course finished with a film of a Sangoma initiation ceremony and background to the preparation.  This was very valuable in order to complete the circle, so to speak.

 We also had a mild examination to refresh our learning experiences and consolidate what we had learnt.  The method of marking/correcting this test was very refreshing as it was not solely concerned with the written examination.  Marks were also awarded for merit and how one had applied oneself to the course.  The end result being that everyone passed and will receive a certificate to boost their confidence.

 We started the project proper with a meeting with Mercy and some of her friends who are already involved in growing vegetables.  This contact was made through Leonard Zulu and I would like to thank him personally for his wise choice of community.  We had a look at the existing garden which had some vegetables growing and some banana trees on the perimeter.  There was a bonfire site in the garden where all the wastes were burnt, including aluminium and plastics, both hugely toxic to the air and soil.  I emphasized the importance of not burning these cancer causing wastes and tried to encourage recycling and separation of wastes i.e. using old milk cartons to provide plant pots for future plant transfers.  The rest of the site was in a degraded state also.  I also spoke to the women about the origins of the soil, history of trees and plants on this planet, the traditions of recognising the spirits in trees, plants and water, as well as the vital functions performed in balancing earth’s natural systems:  soil, climate control, etc.  Trees and plants are the skin of the earth regulating the temperature etc.  All stability of air, soil and water is conferred by trees and vegetation.  I explained how we have to turn now from this destructive economy to one based on an ethical approach i.e. a creative economy.  Unless we play fair to the earth, we cannot exist physically on this planet.

 You can gauge a country’s real wealth by its indigenous forest cover, what shall it profit us if we balance our budgets at the cost of the destruction of the earth beneath our feet? Forests, woodlands and plants are linked to biological, social and spiritual well-being.

 A way forward is to recognise that local communities are the best protectors and enhancers of their local environment once they have been informed.  The loss of their traditional knowledge has been another example of cultural fragmentation.  Like loss of memory, this can be restored too.

 It is possible to literally grow local economies and restore degraded sites using the idea of native treestoration.  This will be a huge growth area in the future and needs to be grasped now as another avenue of expansion for biodiversity and local communities.

 We agreed to start the project the next day via a clean-up of the site and the establishment of fencing to protect and demarcate the site, create a sacred space, which, in fact, it now is.

 The fencing I had prepared at the sculpture centre by recycling abandoned bamboo poles from a discontinued Tangencya project.  I burned the ends of the poles so they would not rot in the ground so easily.  This is an ancient method of wood preservation that does not include chemicals.

 Mercy agreed to have some help on hand to help.  Unfortunately due to logistical problems we arrived late.  When we finally got there the helper had cut down five banana trees which we wished to use for cover as well as noise barriers, there is a motorway on the doorstep of this community.  The helper meant well.  He was told we were tidying up and in this mechanistic age, this means to too many people a scorched earth policy.  Without correct information we can do so much damage unconsciously.

 This was frustrating but also provided a lesson.  The trees will grow back thankfully and I used the stump to show how much water the roots bring up from the ground.  The grandchildren of Mercy were fascinated by this.

 We set to work and transformed the site quickly with the help of many hands, all of which spontaneously volunteered, showing the power of the garden/nature to encourage cooperation.

 Many neighbours and friends commented on this quick transformation over the course of three or four days.

 Zhulelei, a grandson of Mercy, came to Silverglen with us and we booked him into the medicine plant course.  This is a powerful development to ensure the success of the project.

 We went back to Silverglen and purchased suitable plants and trees and began planting same.  An example of completing another circle/cycle, having begun the project in Silverglen via the muti course.

 Mercy and community were so happy, it was very satisfying to have helped out in such a meaningful way.  Mercy told me how no one had ever helped them in such a way.  Quite powerful.

 Once again I had been privileged to be welcomed in this Zulu community and witness the respect for elders, ability to have fun, good humour, the sharing of scant resources, the freedom of young children playing etc., in stark contrast to the security restrictions so many wealthy (so-called) people live with.

 I helped to set up a support network to guide this seed energy project and am optimistic this project will grow and provide leadership and inspiration to many other communities, NGO’s etc going into the future.  The fact that the garden grows provides much inspiration.  The ancient peoples believed the earth was a sentient being and felt the behaviour of mankind on it.  As we have no proof to the contrary, it might be as well to accept this point of view and act accordingly.

 Planting a tree is a looking forward kind of action, yet not too distantly.

 Andrew St Ledger

 ==========================================================

 2(a) WRM RESPONSE TO FSC STATEMENT ON CERTIFICATIONS

 Montevideo, 9 August 2006

 Dear Mr Liedeker,

 On 14 July the FSC issued a statement (“FSC guarantees peace of mind to consumers”) in response to “A recent WRM (World Rainforest Movement) report has called into question the credibility of FSC certification in four plantations in .” In that statement, you are quoted as having said that “Reading the certification body’s reports it is apparent that some information in the WRM report was based on misunderstandings or in some cases presented out of context”.

Unfortunately, I have not been able to access the SGS response (because it was not made public by the FSC) but I have carefully read the response from Smartwood, where no proof is provided about any “misunderstandings” or on anything “presented out of context”. What’s more, Smartwood’s response does not respond to any of the many serious issues raised in the WRM report.

Within the 9 points presented as examples by Smartwood (a – i), four of them (a, b, c, f) simply point out at the fact that I (the author of the WRM report) refused to participate in the certification process. Surely you will agree with me that participation is voluntary and that this is totally unrelated to the issue under discussion.

Point d is the only one which raises a possible “misunderstanding” and which therefore deserves a more lengthy explanation. Smartwood says:

 “The WRM report states that the head of a local workers union (Jose Bautista) indicated to SW his perspectives on FYMNSA certification and SW ignored them (“lo que dije a SmartWood sobre la certificación de FYMNSA no lo tuvieron en cuenta para nada" y que “luego que vino SmartWood a los pocos días había un gran cartel de la certificadora en las oficinas de la empresa"). [“everything that I told SmartWood with regard to the certification of FYMNSA was completely disregarded.” Meanwhile, after SmartWood came to assess FYMNSA’s operations, “within a few days there was a big SmartWood poster hanging in the company’s offices”]. We would clarify the following: SOIMANORPA, which Mr. Bautista heads up, was established in 2003. He was never interviewed during the initial assessment of FYMNSA simply because this organization did not exist at the moment. He was interviewed during subsequent assessment of another operation, Villa Luz, where he met with SW auditors Jacques Boutmy and Rolyn Medina. During that meeting he indicated that, from his perspective, WRM was not up to date on actual social or worker realities of operations in the field. He also indicated that FYMNSA was a leader in allowing the workers union to interact with FYMNSA workers, that his union maintains constant and very open communication with FYMNSA.”

That is Smartwood’s version. I spoke on Thursday, 20th of July 2006 with Mr Bautista and asked him if he agreed with the points raised above by Smartwood. His answer was: “It’s all false”. Mr Bautista is a very well organized person and keeps record of all he does. He was therefore able to track the meeting quoted above with Jacques Boutmy and Rolyn Medina, and discovered that it took place on 20 October 2004, well before WRM had even thought about carrying out this research!

I asked him more specifically on whether in his view “FYMNSA was a leader in allowing the workers union to interact with FYMNSA workers”. Once again he replied: “it’s false”. With reference to SW's statement that “his union maintains constant and very open communication with FYMNSA”, Bautista explained that even though the company receives the union, that's just a mere formality. And he added: “three days ago I was interviewed in Rivera by TV Channel 6 and by four local radios and I said that the company was violating labour rights and that it should have never been certified. Maybe that’s the reason why Smartwood has reacted in this way”.

Even worse, Mr Bautista explained at length the present very conflictive situation resulting from the company’s violation of labour regulations and sent me in writing a summary of the main points of the conflict (see below). Contrary to what Smartwood’s response seems to imply, the document ends stating: “Dialogue with the Union still exists but the reverting of FYMNSA’s breaches of labour legislation and respect for trade union organization and workers has not been achieved.”

The above alone puts into question the credibility of Smartwood and calls for an urgent independent investigation by the FSC on this issue.

Additionally, Smartwood’s response does not mention any of the serious issues raised in our report which concludes that the four companies involved (one of which certified by Smartwood) do not comply with the social, environmental and economic mandate of FSC. For instance, in the case of FYMNSA:

    - environmental impacts on native grasslands

    - disappearance of local fauna

    - depletion of water resources

    - use of alien invasive species (Fraxinus americana, Melia azedarach, Pinus elliottii)

    - diminished employment and lower salaries than in the past

    - bad working conditions, where most of the workers are outsourced

    - impacts on other agricultural and cattle raising activities

    - impacts on local commercial activities

Within that context of violation of FCS’s mandate, it is sad to read that in the FSC statement you “warn”, Mr Liedeker that “FSC is ... nor an instrument to create publicity for ‘Anti-Plantations-Campaigns’”, implying that the WRM report is simply trying to create such publicity and to use the FSC as a tool for its campaigns. The issue is entirely the opposite. The FSC is certifying a type of plantation (large-scale tree monocultures), that impacts negatively on people and the environment and thereby leading to a loss of credibility in the FSC label. This is precisely the reason why the FSC decided to launch a plantations certification review, which we welcome. One of our aims is to feed that process with as much documented information as possible, so that such large-scale tree plantations are not certified in the future. If that happens, it would be a very positive outcome, both for local communities struggling against those plantations in many countries, and for the FSC itself, that would strengthen its main asset: its credibility. We also expect, as you do, “the work of the working group to yield in many critical respects a much improved approach to FSC certification of plantation forestry.”

However, it is not by ignoring the facts and believing what certifiers say, that the FSC will achieve that aim. We therefore urge you to investigate further the issues raised in the WRM report, so that you can effectively “guarantee peace of mind to consumers”.

 Yours sincerely,

Ricardo Carrere

 WRM Report available athttp://www.wrm.org.uy/publications/index.html.

 ==========================================================

 2(b) FORESTRY WORKERS UNSION (SUNOF – formerly SOIMANORPA) – 20 July 2006

 The Forestry Workers Union (Sindicato de Obreros Forestales –SUNOF) is in a state of pre-conflict with the Rivera based forestry company FYMNSA, due to the company’s aggressive attitude and breaching of labour regulations over the past months with regard to the workers.

First of all, in February not only did FYMNSA not adjust salaries according to the provisions of the Salary councils, but it lowered them.

Furthermore and in spite of the reiterated demands made by the trade union and even by the legal system, it continues to disregard the 8 hour work day and does not pay the overtime generated every day.

FYMNSA’s ruling that obliges workers – over 150 – to work on State holidays, which came into force on 1 May and prevented tens of workers from attending the celebration of Workers Day as arranged by the Union, has also caused unrest.

During the month of June FYMNSA also brought into force working rules that include dozens of articles and represents a real “military code” of the way FYMNSA expects workers to behave in the company.

The limit came last week when a 66 year-old union member, with 10 years seniority in the company and with no disciplinary antecedents, called the company to the Ministry of Labour and Social Security, claiming payment of overtime and the board and lodging benefit. The owner of the company, Mr. Lorenzo Balerio shouted reprimands and dismissed him. To date, the worker has not even received his redundancy payment. This is an abuse.

Dialogue with the Union still exists but the reverting of FYMNSA’s breaches of labour legislation and respect for trade union organization and workers has not been achieved.

Forestry Workers Union (SUNOF – formerly SOIMANORPA)

20 July 2006

 ==========================================================

 2(c) FSC GUARANTEES PEACE OF MIND TO CONSUMERS

 A recent WRM (World Rainforest Movement) report has called into question the credibility of FSC certification in four plantations in .

The two FSC accredited certification bodies responsible for these certifications have investigated the issues and have now provided their responses to FSC. The certifiers’ reports clarify and justify the decision to certify the companies named in the WRM report. ‘Reading the certification body’s reports it is apparent that some information in the WRM report was based on misunderstandings or in some cases presented out of context’ , said Heiko Liedeker, Director of FSC International.

FSC has a well established and internationally recognized accreditation program which monitors the performance of accredited certification bodies and ensures that their certification of forest management operations complies with FSC’s international standards for socially beneficial, environmentally appropriate and economically viable forest management.

As part of the certification bodies’ assessment of forest management FSC requires extensive consultation with local stakeholders to ensure that the needs of local people are respected and met. Along with many other stakeholders in Uruguay WRM was contacted during these processes to raise their concerns. Smartwood’s public summary documents this well. The FSC accredited certification bodies will continue to involve social, environmental and economic stakeholders at every annual monitoring visit to each of their certified operations.

‘FSC values and encourages the very active and often critical engagement of local stakeholders and NGOs. But FSC is neither campaigning against plantations nor an instrument to create publicity for ‘Anti-Plantations-Campaigns’’, warns Liedeker. The FSC General Assembly discussed at length whether or not plantation forestry should be certifiable just like management of natural and semi-natural forests. It concluded with overwhelming support of its social, environmental and economic constituents that FSC shall not exclude plantations from its scope, but instead review its approach to certification of plantations. The aim of the review process is to ensure that certification of plantations does promote best practices.

Over the past 30 months a working group with balanced representation of social, environmental and economic stakeholders from the Global South as well as the Global North has reviewed in-depth all aspect of best practice in plantation forestry. This working group held extensive consultations around the world to ensure that experience and knowledge of local stakeholders, especially of those affected by plantation forestry is included. The working group will publish the results of its work in fall 2006. We expect the work of the working group to yield in many critical respects a much improved approach to FSC certification of plantation forestry.

‘The FSC label continues to make every effort to promote socially and environmentally responsible forest management in plantations as well as natural and semi-natural forests. Consumers can count on the FSC system as a guarantee for good forest management’, promises Liedeker.

The SmartWood report can be found at:http://www.rainforestalliance.org/programs/forestry/smartwood/documents/fymnsa_clarifications.pdf

After the annual audit of the companies mentioned in the WRM report, SmartWood will provide further information upon request.

The SGS report is not public. For further information, please contact Gerrit Marais (Director of SGS Qualifor Program) (Gerrit.Marais@sgs.com).

For further information contact Nina Haase, Communications Manager, FSC International Center Bonn,n.haase@fsc.org; +49 228 367 66 29

July 14^th 2006

 ==========================================================

 3. DÁIL DEBATES

 366. Mr. Cuffe asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food if, in regard to the consultation process regarding the Forestry Review and the basis on which the decision to exclude the Forestry Act 1988 from this review was made, she will provide the Houses of the Oireachtas with the record by which this decision was made and include all correspondence with the Department, which is the main shareholder on behalf of the public in this semi-State body, and all correspondence with Coillte regarding the review; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [26687/06]

 Minister for Agriculture and Food (Mary Coughlan):    The review of forestry legislation under way at present is concentrating on the operational provisions of the various Acts. Because of this, the main focus is on the 1946 Act but the 1988 Act is not excluded, insofar as it deals with operational matters such as, for example, the level of penalties.

 The role of Coillte is ultimately a matter for Government to decide and any changes to the legislation establishing Coillte could only be considered following a decision to review or change that role. The role of Coillte is not being considered in this review.

 The Terms of Reference of the current review have been published and are currently posted on my Department’s website. This website is updated on a monthly basis to report progress in the review. The scope of the current review was set by my Department and there was no correspondence with Coillte on the specific matter raised in the question.

 367. Mr. Cuffe asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food the location, area, parties involved, reasons and terms of any lands exchanged by Coillte in the past three years under Section 39 of the Forestry Act 1988; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [26688/06]

 Minister for Agriculture and Food (Mary Coughlan):    Coillte Teoranta was established as a private commercial company under the Forestry Act 1988 and day to day operational matters are the responsibility of the company. The exchange of land is a matter of an operational nature for Coillte.

 I am advised, however, that there were three land exchanges by the company since the commencement of 2003. I would suggest that the Deputy contact the company directly for the breakdown sought.

 ==========================================================

 4. CELT UPDATE

 CELT - Centre for Environmental Living and Training    www.celtnet.org

 Forthcoming events at Bealkelly Wood, Tuamgraney, Co. Clare:

Open Day - Saturday 2nd September, 1pm - Free - Skills demos, Displays, Guided Walks

Weekend in the Woods - 7th / 8th October - Choice from 18 different skills courses

 At The Heritage Centre, Tuamgraney : 
Sunday 20th August, 2pm - Free - Wildlife / Biodiversity - Illustrated talk and guided walk (To book, phone 065-684-6456)

 Successful 'Summer in the Woods'

 Thanks to all involved in Summer in the Woods over 22 / 23 / 24 July.  Apologies once more for delay at registration - it was a bit of a fluster with so many arriving at once - we are adjusting our system to avoid such delays in future, and request all participants to let us have full payment in advance if possible, or at least try to arrive early and be sure to have sent in deposit and membership (if applicable).  Otherwise feedback has been very positive and people seemed to enjoy the weekend - the good weather helped, especially for those taking a dip in the lake!  Some great work was done on various building projects and we were pleased to see many people taking home excellent pieces of furniture, utensils, jewellery, wood carving, longbows, etc.

 Weekend in the Woods - 7th / 8th October - Bealkelly Wood, Tuamgraney, Co.Clare - choice of 18 courses in traditional skills / crafts.  Details now on the website (see below) - many of the same popular courses available - book on-line now !

 Canoe building course - 4 weekends starts 26 / 27 August - Build your own canoe - timber frame covered with canvas proofed with linseed oil and painted (or can be fibre-glass covered if preferred). Alternatively build a simple wooden boat (similar to the old traditional turf boat). 4 consecutive weekends with optional free extra weekend if needed to complete the work (or if a weekend unavoidably missed). Course fee 400 euros plus membership (15 euro) if applicable and estimated 150 - 180 euors for materials. Participants should have basic woodworking skills. To book, send deposit 100 euros plus contact details and what you want to build. Phone Del Harding 061-923041 for further info

 CELT Open Day - Sunday 3rd September - 1pm to 6pm - Bealkelly Wood, Tuamgraney, Co.Clare

As a contribution to Heritage Week, CELT will provide traditional skills demonstrations, displays about woodland / wetland ecology / biodiversity and guided walks through the woodland and by the holy well, stream, ponds and lakeshore.  No official cover charge, but donations welcome towards CELT environmental education and training programmes.

 Directors' comments :

 We are lucky to have the cooperation of Del Harding and use of his beautiful woodland and ask that all visitors to our events please respect the place and use facilities with care - also remember that the animals have a greater right to be there than we do.  Please take litter home or at least use marked bags for recycling and please ensure that the gate is kept shut at all times.  The woodland is private and not open to the public when events / courses are not in progress.

 It is part of CELT ethos to keep events affordable to the less well-off, at the same time we need to pay staff, rent, insurance, buy tools and equipment, etc - much help towards this has been through funding from the Heritage Council, LEADER, Clare VEC and other sponsors.  We still have to struggle with only part-time and volunteer staff so anyone who can help source funding / sponsorship - your help will be greatly appreciated by the hundreds of people who take part in our events and projects.

 We are currently doing a project to improve biodiversity in an interesting wetland / stream / pond / lakeshore part of Bealkelly Wood - part funded by the Biodiversity Fund through the Heritage Council.  Anyone who is interested in helping with this, please get in touch.

 CELT Centre for Environmental Living and Training
c/o East Clare Community Coop, Scariff, Co.Clare,
www.celtnet.org  info@celtnet.org   Tel: 061-640765 / 087-632-4644

 ==========================================================

 5. INSIGHT CALL FOR PAPERS

 Due to the impact of holdays on contributors' ability to deliver final copies for August, the release of issue 4 of Insight has been held over by one month until the end of September. We had suspected that this might well happen, but felt it was worth giving August a shot.

 As a result, we are still open to new submissions until 15th September.

 Articles, notes, news and reviews relating to 's human and natural heritage are acceptable; for issue 4 we are especially interested in discussions of the relationship between communities and their local heri