RE: Industrial Timber Plantations - Sustainable?
values, rather then seeking a balance for every location. I suspect that the grass landscape in your region is maintained by fire, rather then being a true climax. As such, fire disturbance prevents tree seedlings from establishing and growing to maturity. Thus, removing fire is a 'human disturbance' that can be useful for establishing and maintaining a forest cover, but prone to cause long-term ecological unbalances. Such is the case when fire is removed and insect populations rise to epidemic levels. Forest monocultures aren't wrong per say. Nature often functions this way, as some species are better adapted for certain environments than others. Species exclusion, or extreme lethal vegetation competition, is a natural mechanism. What's not so natural is when an alien species is being established in an environment that cannot handle its presence. This might be the case in your region since the plantations are lifeless, and lead to problems such as 'green deserts', 'green cancer' and 'ecological wastelands'. Whether or not the soil will modify itself, due to the presence of trees and removal of fire disturbance, and become a productive medium is questionable. It depends. Yes, you are right in affirming that the soil will have more fungi; basidiomycetes. These forest fungi grow well with wood substrates (see the BDNow discussions on wood chips). The question of biodiversity is difficult. If the forester has good knowledge in site restoration and soil health, then biodiversity might stay the same; lost species will be replaced by new ones. Could it be that your region was once a forest and latter transformed into a grassland because of climate change and human impact? This is the case for many deserts in the world. And... there are now holistic techniques for bringing back 'natural forests' to these areas, if this is the values that people want. Personally, I would first ask myself which tree species could grow naturally in that location, rather then force alien species.I'm sure that if you go for a walk-about and observe the landscape you'll find the answer. Then, I would learn more about the reproductive nature of these tree species. It could well be that they need shrubs and other organisms to help them regenerate properly. Anyway... this is just a reflection of my personal value system. As the visiting scientist if they plan to chemically fertilize the plantation, or if they have a management plan for insect infestations, or how they will prevent fire from burning the forest. Also, why they are not interested in reclaiming the sites with natural tree species. Is it that they have already established a wood market, or that they don't know what the hell they are doing? And finally, what is the set of values that they want to sustain (jobs, $$$,...)? Philip, what do you do in Africa? Are you farming land? ( I'm a forest ecologist in Canada) Cheers, Robin - Original Message - From: Philip Owen [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 13 octobre, 2002 04:05 Subject: Industrial Timber Plantations - Sustainable? Dear BDNow Here in Mpumalanga Escarment, South Africa, most of the original climax grasslands have been planted to industrial monoculture pine and eucalyptus plantations. Both these species are alien to the region. These alien timber plantations are the mother of all monocultures, with drastic impacts on biodiversity and vital functions performed by the original integrated natural environment. Conditions in the understory of these plantations are lifeless, leading to terms such as 'green deserts', 'green cancer' and 'ecological wastelands' beieng applied. As I understand grasslands are bacterially dominated, and forests dominated by fungi. As these grasslands locally are being replaced by 'false forests' the soil landscape is becoming fungal dominated. At an upcoming meeting scientists associated with the industry will argue that this implies the soil will become progressively better for growing timber, and that soil nutrient quality in timber stands are actually improving for tree growing...??? How can this be true? Surely the fact that it is a mono culture with extremely limited biodiversity and ecological interactions dooms it to medium / long term soil nutrient depletion? Your comments will be much appreciated. Philip Owen www.geasphere.co.za http://www.geasphere.co.za/
Industrial Timber Plantations - Sustainable?
Dear BDNow Here in Mpumalanga Escarment, South Africa, most of the original climax grasslands have been planted to industrial monoculture pine and eucalyptus plantations. Both these species are alien to the region. These alien timber plantations are the mother of all monocultures, with drastic impacts on biodiversity and vital functions performed by the original integrated natural environment. Conditions in the understory of these plantations are lifeless, leading to terms such as green deserts, green cancer and ecological wastelands beieng applied. As I understand grasslands are bacterially dominated, and forests dominated by fungi. As these grasslands locally are being replaced by false forests the soil landscape is becoming fungal dominated. At an upcoming meeting scientists associated with the industry will argue that this implies the soil will become progressively better for growing timber, and that soil nutrient quality in timber stands are actually improving for tree growing..??? How can this be true? Surely the fact that it is a mono culture with extremely limited biodiversity and ecological interactions dooms it to medium / long term soil nutrient depletion? Your comments will be much appreciated. Philip Owen www.geasphere.co.za
Vandana Shiva - In Praise Of Cowdung
From: http://www.zmag.org ZNet Commentary In Praise Of Cowdung November 15, 2002 By Vandana Shiva In India we worship cow dung as Lakshmi, the goddess of wealth. Gobur-dhan puja is literally the worship of gobur (cowdung) dhan (wealth). Cow dung is worshipped because it is the source of renewal of soil fertility and hence the sustainability of human society. The cow has been made sacred in India because it is a keystone species for agro-ecosystems -- it is key to the sustainability of agriculture. When Monsanto and biotech industry spokesmen parading as farmers presented me with cow dung at the WSSD in Johannesburg, I accepted their award as a tribute to organic farming and sustainable agriculture. The small farmers convergence at the W.S.S.D. with farmers from across Africa rejected GMO's, and chemicals and committed themselves to organic farming, and defense of farmers rights. They are freely choosing seeds they can save and technologies that are sustainable. Farmers organizations in India and in Africa are saying no to GMO's on the basis of their freedom to choose to be organic which means being free of genetic contamination that results from GM crops. Genetic contamination robs farmers of their freedom to be GM free. Patients and intellectual property rights on seed rob farmers of their freedom to save, exchange, develop seed. Farmers are treated as thieves and criminals for exercising farmers rights. The worst example is that of Parcy Schmeiser whose canola fields were contaminated by Monsanto's GM canola and he was sued for theft of genes. That is why those of us who farm organically and want to maintain our freedom to farm and uphold farmers rights are resisting the irresponsible corporations which are trying to own life on earth, including seed, contaminate our crops and food and have total control over farming and farmers. GM seeds and chemicals are a threat to farmers survival, a threat to consumer health and a threat to the environment. Farmers in Punjab and Andhra Pradesh are committing suicides because the costly seeds and chemicals from corporations like Monsanto/Mahyco have pushed them into deep, unpayable debt. The claims of Monsanto and its apologists like Swaminathan Iyer (who called me a Green Killer in the Times of India on 22nd Sept 2002, because I practise and promote organic farming) that GM can feed the world is totally false. Monsanto's Bt cotton has failed across India in its first year of commercial planting. In Khargone in Madhya Pradesh Bt is a 100% failure and farmers are demanding compensation. In Maharastra, the Bt crop has failed on 30,000 hec and farmers are asking for Rs. 500 crore compensation. In Gujarat, in Bhavnagar, Surendranagar and Rajkot Bt cotton has been destroyed by a heavy infestation of bollworm, the pest for whose control the toxin producing Bt. gene has been engineered into cotton. The genetically engineered Bt cotton is not a miracle, it is a fraud on farmers. In Rajasthan, the hybrid corn which Monsanto claims will give 20 -- 50 quintals per acre is giving 1.5 to 1.7 quintals per acre while demanding intensive water and chemical use, aggravating the draught and famine. The pseudo scientific claims of irresponsible biotech corporations like Monsanto are killing our farmers, our agriculture, our biodiversity. Organic agriculture is increasing farm productivity by 2 to 3 times, increasing farmers incomes, and protecting public health and the environment. That is why the Time Magazine identified Navdanya as a pioneer for the new century and stated that In India atleast, Navdanya sets an eco-friendly standard that agribusiness must show it can out perform. The challenge for genetic engineers is to create seeds adapted to particular locales that enable farmers to reduce, not increase, the use of chemicals (Time, Aug 26, 2002, Seeds of self Reliance, p 36) Monsanto and its lobbyists profit by selling and promoting poisonous, toxic seeds and corporate control. Movements like Navdanya celebrate biodiversity, farmers freedom and cow dung. The corporations and corporate spokespeople are getting desperate because people are seeing through their lies and deceptions. With organic farming growing worldwide, and the failures and non-sustainability of genetic engineering and chemical engineering becoming evident, the chemical corporate lobby is getting desperate. I view their personal assaults on me as a symptom of the desperation caused by the failure of non-sustainable industrial, corporate agriculture in removing hunger or improving farmers livelihoods. Sustainable systems are growing because they offer real solutions to the hunger and poverty crisis. And cow dung, biomass and biodiversity are at the heart of sustainability and the non-violent organic alternative to genetic engineering and chemicals. Ecologically the cow has been central to Indian civilization. Both materially an conceptually the world of Indian
S.A. National Parks Petition - Keep It Wild!
We are at a time that we need to consider our relationship with Earth. We can no longer afford to exploit finite natural resources at the expense of the integrated environment. We will have to drastically limit our impact, maximize recycling and minimize waste. We must protect, manage and restore natural ecosystems to conserve biodiversity and maintain ecological services. Most importantly, we must learn to respect all life, recognizing that all is connected and interdependant and that there are limits to exploitation. www.geasphere.co.za The South African National Parks Petition The South African National Parks (SANParks) have embarked on a commercialization programme that will significantly alter the character of our National Parks and that threatens to irretrievably alter the undeveloped status of large tracts of relatively untouched wilderness. The commercialisation programme includes not only the privatisation of a number of facilities and services but also the construction of an indeterminate number of new lodges and roads and the granting of rights for exclusive use of considerable prime portions of land within our national parks including the Kruger National Park. This will include, inter alia, off-road driving, a considerable increase in night traffic, commercial air traffic in and out of our park(s), and increased private and commercial traffic on the existing road network of the parks. The sale and harvesting of game, birds and other resources in our parks, in order to make money, has not been ruled out as a possibility. The decision to embark on this high impact programme that has no defined end (ie. how much development is acceptable) and scope to indicate what forms of developments and activities are appropriate or desirable, was made: with extremely limited public participation without an in-depth investigation to look for lower impact alternative means of generating income for the SANParks without consideration to the cumulative and off-site impacts of the luxury private concessions (the individual, compartmentalised developments' Environmental Impact Assessments DO NOT address these very important impacts); without a preceding or concurrent investigation and programme having been put in place to ensure SANParks are optimally managed and structured in terms of cost effectiveness (efficiency) and accountability (to minimise unnecessary losses); and without fully complying with all the principles and requirements of applicable legislation that is currently in place to protect the integrity of the environment (eg.Section 22 of the Environmental Conservation Act [Act No. 73 of 1989] and the National Environmental Management Act [Act No. 107 of 1998]). We support the idea that National Parks should be managed in a manner that minimises the need for government subsidies and in a manner that creates jobs and generates a profit, wherever feasible. However, this must not compromise or destroy the essence and uniqueness of what makes many people wish to visit our National Parks (and our country) in the first place. Wilderness areas are irreplaceable and are ever-increasingly becoming more rare and more valuable on a global scale. Development decisions need to be made only after careful and thorough consideration of these facts and of the needs of future generations, to whom we have an obligation to ensure they are left with some options of their own. Already, we have left them with arguably too little undeveloped land. We thus support proposals for some, suitably low impact and truly peripheral developments, where these are deemed appropriate through the application of the Precautionary Principle (err on the side of caution) to ensure that long term / permanent loss is not incurred through decisions motivated by short and medium term needs / profits. We call for an immediate halt to the concession process until such time as: a) A comprehensive Strategic Environmental Assessment has been conducted in which all the cumulative and off-site impacts of the concessions have been identified and addressed; b) A thorough investigation has been conducted to identify and consider all alternatives; c) The scope and extent of the commercialisation programme have been firmly set; d) An environmental management system that will capacitate the SANParks to effectively manage and monitor the programme has been developed and implemented; and e) A proper public participation programme has been conducted! To register your support, click here on our Petition Website: http://www.mylittleblackbook.co.za/Petitions For more information go to : http://www.geasphere.co.za/sawilderness Geasphere Website Also visit the http://www.parks-sa.co.za/ Parks Website Should you wish to support the plea to preserve the integrity of South Africa's National Parks through a moratorium on commercial developments until these 5 requirements have been addressed, please add your name to the petition.
