by | 2011-09-21 · 11:20

Environmental Groups Denounce Diversion of Forest Funding to REDD Plantations

For Immediate Release

September 21, 2011                                        (Español debajo)

 

September 21st, 2011 – On the World Day against Monoculture Tree Plantations [1], a coalition of environmental groups and Indigenous peoples organizations [2] has launched a call to the international donor community to halt the diversion of forest conservation funding to dubious schemes to “Reduce Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation and enhance forest carbon stocks” (REDD+), which are being promoted within the framework of the United Nations Climate Convention.

The groups charge that climate policy makers are working with a flawed definition of “forests” that includes monocultures, genetically engineered trees and agrofuel plantations.

“This erroneous definition allows REDD+ funding to finance the expansion of monoculture tree plantations, which are implicated in serious environmental and social impacts and human rights violations all over the world,” said Winnie Overbeek, coordinator of the World Rainforest Movement.

More than five hundred scientists have called on the UN Food and Agricultural Organization to review the definition of forest [3], so that a clear distinction can be made between biologically diverse forest ecosystems, which provide a broad range of values and products for humanity, and monoculture tree plantations.

Also on the World Day against Monoculture Tree Plantations, the World Future Council will hold a ceremony in New York to hand an award to the most inspiring, innovative, and influential forest policy [4]. Simone Lovera, Executive Director of Global Forest Coalition, and one of the jury members of this year’s award, points out: “It is important to note that the six countries nominated, The Gambia, Rwanda, United States, Bhutan, Nepal, and Switzerland, have developed their successful forest policies without any REDD+ support” [5].

“Most of these successes are based on a combination of political will and the recognition of the rights of local communities and their valuable role in conserving and restoring forests,” Lovera said. “Forest donors should support initiatives and policies that ensure rights-based, socially just forest conservation rather than diverting their funding to risky REDD+ experiments that promote tree monocultures and human rights violations.”

Tom Goldtooth, director of Indigenous Environmental Network adds: “All over the world, monoculture tree plantations and other REDD+ projects are triggering conflicts with Indigenous Peoples and local communities and environmental devastation. Meanwhile, support is lacking for socially just and successful policies that support real community forest conservation.”

Many REDD+ donors speculate that their projects will soon be financed through mandatory carbon offset markets, which they expect will bring significant additional investment. However, carbon offset markets are collapsing due to fears that countries will fail to reach an agreement on legally binding emission cuts beyond 2012.

“Without global caps, there will be no global trade,” says Tamra Gilbertson of Carbontradewatch. “The European Emissions Trading Scheme – the world’s primary carbon exchange – excludes REDD+ due to well-founded concerns that forest carbon offsets undermine real efforts to reduce emissions. REDD+ funding has proven to be highly volatile, inequitable and uncertain. In order to both combat climate change and to value forests in their own right, forest conservation policies need reliable, stable and equitable support – not disingenuous and patently false solutions like REDD+.”

For further information, contact:

Winnie Overbeek, Coordinator, World Rainforest Movement, +598 2 413 2989

Tom Goldtooth, Executive Director, Indigenous Environmental Network, + 1 218 760 0442

Simone Lovera, Executive Director, Global Forest Coalition, + 595 21 663654

Tamra Gilbertson, Coordinator, Carbontrade Watch, + 34 625 498083

Jeff Conant, Communications Director, Global Justice Ecology Project, +1 510 698 3802

Notes:

[1] See http://www.wrm.org.uy

[2] The No REDD Platform is a loose network of researchers, activists, organizations and movements that work together by sharing information, organizing collective strategies and supporting each other. By connecting with global justice movements committed to climate, environmental and social justice the No REDD Platform aims to expose the injustices inherent in REDD+ projects globally. See  http://noredd.makenoise.org

[3] http://www.wrm.org.uy/forests/letter_to_the_FAO.html

[4] See http://www.worldfuturecouncil.org/4398.html

[5] Please note that of these countries, Nepal is the only country that currently receives significant amounts of REDD+ support, but its successful policy on supporting community-based forest management was developed long before the first REDD+ support started to arrive.

Para Publicación Inmediata

Septiembre 21, 2011

Grupos Ambientalistas Denuncian la Desviación de Fondos Destinados a los Bosques hacia Plantaciones REDD

21 Septiembre, 2011 – En el Día Mundial de Lucha Contra los Monocultivos de Arboles [1], una coalición de grupos ambientalistas y organizaciones de Pueblos Indígenas [2] ha lanzado un comunicado a la comunidad donante internacional para detener la desviación de fondos para la conservación de los bosques hacia esquemas dudosos para “Reducir Emisiones de Deforestación y Degradación de Bosques y fortalecer las reservas de carbono” (REDD+) las cuales se están promoviendo dentro de la Convención Marco de la ONU sobre el Cambio Climático.

Los grupos claman que los responsables de las políticas de cambio climático están trabajando en base a una definición de “bosques” defectuosa que incluye a los monocultivos, los árboles Genéticamente Modificados, y las plantaciones de agrocombustibles.

“Esta definición errónea permite que los fondos REDD+ financien la expansión de monocultivos de árboles los cuales están involucrados con serios impactos ambientales y sociales y violaciones a los derechos humanos alrededor del mundo”, según Winnie Overbeek del Movimiento Mundial por los Bosques tropicales.

Más de quinientos científicos han hecho un llamado a la Organización de la ONU para la Agricultura y la Alimentación para revisar la definición de bosques [3], y así se pueda hacer una clara distinción entre ecosistemas de bosque biológicamente diversos que proporcionan un amplio rango de valores y productos para la humanidad, y los monocultivos y/o plantaciones de árboles.

También durante el Día Mundial de Lucha Contra los Monocultivos de Arboles, el Consejo del Futuro Mundial realizará una ceremonia en Nueva York para entregar un premio a la política forestal más inspiradora, innovadora, e influyente [4]. Simone Lovera, Directora Ejecutiva de la Coalición Mundial por los Bosques, y una de los miembros del jurado de este año señala que: “Es importante notar que los seis países nominados, Gambia, Ruanda, Estados Unidos, Bután, Nepal y Suiza, han desarrollado sus exitosas políticas forestales sin ningún apoyo de REDD+” [5].

“La mayoría de estos éxitos se basan en una combinación de voluntad política y el reconocimiento de los derechos de las comunidades locales y su valioso rol en la conservación y restauración de bosques,” dijo Lovera. “Los donantes de bosques deberían premiar los esfuerzos de estos países en vez de desviar sus fondos hacia experimentos riesgosos de REDD+ que promueven los monocultivos de árboles y las violaciones a los derechos humanos”.

Tom Goldtooth, Director de la Red Indígena Ambiental añade: “Alrededor del mundo, los monocultivos de árboles y otros proyectos REDD+ están disparando los conflictos con Pueblos Indígenas y comunidades locales, y la devastación ambiental. Entre tanto, el apoyo para políticas exitosas y socialmente justas que apoyen la verdadera conservación forestal comunitaria disminuye”.

Muchos donantes de REDD+ especulan que sus proyectos pronto se financiarán por medio de mercados obligatorios de compensación de carbono, de donde ellos esperan recibir importantes inversiones adicionales. Sin embargo, los mercados de compensación de carbono están colapsando debido a los temores que se tienen de que los países no lograrán llegar a un acuerdo respecto a la reducción de emisiones legalmente vinculantes más allá del 2012.

“Sin límites globales, no habrá comercio global”, dice Tamra Gilbertson de Carbontradewatch. “El Régimen Europeo de Comercio de Emisiones –  el principal en intercambio de créditos carbono mundialmente – excluye REDD+ debido a preocupaciones bien fundamentadas en que las compensaciones de carbono forestal socavan los esfuerzos reales para reducir las emisiones. Los fondos de REDD+ han demostrado ser altamente volátiles, desequilibrados e inciertos. Para poder tanto combatir el cambio climático como valorar a los bosques en su derecho propio, las políticas de conservación de bosques necesitan un apoyo confiable, estable y equitativo – no deshonesto con soluciones claramente falsas como REDD+.”

Para mayor información contactar con:

Winnie Overbeek, Coordinadora, World Rainforest Movement, +598 2 413 2989

Tom Goldtooth, Director Ejecutivo, Indigenous Environmental Network, + 1 218 760 0442

Simone Lovera, Directora Ejecutiva, Global Forest Coalition, + 595 21 663654

Tamra Gilbertson, Coordinadora, Carbontrade Watch, + 34 625 498083

Jeff Conant, Director de Comunicaciones, Global Justice Ecology Project, +1 510 698 3802

Notas:

[1] Ver http://www.wrm.org.uy

[2] La Plataforma No-REDD es una red de investigadores, activistas, organizaciones y movimientos que trabajan conjuntamente compartiendo información, organizando estrategias colectivas y apoyándose mutuamente. Al conectarse con movimientos de justicia social comprometidos con el cambio climático, la justicia social y ambiental, la Plataforma NO REDD busca exponer las injusticias inherentes de los proyectos REDD+ a nivel global. Ver http://noredd.makenoise.org

[3] http://www.wrm.org.uy/forests/letter_to_the_FAO.html

[4] Ver http://www.worldfuturecouncil.org/4398.html

[5] Por favor note que de estos países, Nepal es el único que aún recibe cantidades importantes de apoyo para REDD+, pero su política exitosa que apoya el manejo comunitario de bosques fue desarrollada mucho antes de que el primer apoyo a REDD+ empezara a llegar.

Comments Off on Environmental Groups Denounce Diversion of Forest Funding to REDD Plantations

Filed under Climate Change, False Solutions to Climate Change, Indigenous Peoples, UNFCCC

Tagged as , , , , , , , ,

by | · 09:53

World Bank Forest Carbon Schemes Charged with Displacing Communities in the Global South, Furthering Pollution in the Global North

For Immediate Release                                  21 September 2011

 (Español debajo)

 Washington, DC – As the World Bank, the largest source of multilateral financing for forestry projects, [1] prepares for its fall meetings here, Global Justice Ecology Project charges that the Bank’s promotion of the controversial forest-carbon scheme called REDD (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) harms both forests and forest dependent communities in developing countries, while encouraging continued pollution in vulnerable communities in developed countries like the U.S.

Following the announcement of a new sub-national REDD agreement between the states of California, USA, Chiapas, Mexico and Acre, Brazil during the UN Climate Conference in Cancun last December, Global Justice Ecology Project launched an investigation into the potential on-the-ground impacts of REDD. In March and April of 2011, GJEP traveled to Chiapas to investigate social and ecological impacts of the REDD project there, which is being designed to create carbon offset credits by quantifying the carbon stored by trees in the Montes Azules Biosphere Reserve in the Lacandon Jungle.

“During our investigation, we went to the community of Amador Hernandez, deep in the jungle,” stated Orin Langelle, from Global Justice Ecology Project.  “The villagers reported to us that the Mexican government was withholding medical services as a means to pressure them to leave.  If they refused, they feared the Mexican military would force them to leave, as has happened to other Indigenous communities in the Lacandon jungle.” [2]

Environmental justice groups also warn that REDD agreement will have detrimental impacts on people in California. “The carbon offsets from this REDD agreement are going to allow people in places like Richmond and Wilmington, California to continue to be polluted and sickened by polluting industries like the Chevron and Tesoro oil refineries,” said Joaquín Quetzal Sánchez, Oakland, California-based Strategist for CrossRoots: Building a Sustainable Movement.

“This REDD agreement will harm communities on all sides of the border.  The only ones that win are the polluters,” Sanchez said. [3]

In October, GJEP will travel to Acre, Brazil to meet with groups concerned about the REDD project there, and to document the actual and potential impacts of the project. GJEP plans to bring representatives from Chiapas to this meeting to further opportunities for cross-border strategizing regarding the California-Chiapas-Acre REDD deal.

The effort to “protect forests” by removing the people that depend on them contradicts recent studies that demonstrate forests are best protected when the communities depending on them have legal title.  In a six-year study, CIFOR (the Center for International Forestry Research) found that, “Tropical forests designated as strictly protected areas have annual deforestation rates much higher than those managed by local communities”. [4]

The World Bank has been involved in the global forest/climate program known as REDD through its Forest Carbon Partnership Facility[5], announced by World Bank President Robet Zoellick, during the 2007 UN Climate Conference in Bali, Indonesia. The announcement met with strong popular protest, and the World Bank continues to draw sharp criticism for its role in promoting schemes that displace forest dependent communities and promote large-scale industrial tree plantations that could potentially include socially and ecologically dangerous genetically engineered trees. [6] [7]

Today is the International Day of Action Against Monoculture Tree Plantations.  Last year GJEP released this video highlighting their concerns about tree plantations and genetically engineered trees.

Contacts:

Anne Petermann, Executive Director, Global Justice Ecology Project; North American Focal Point, Global Forest Coalition +1.802.578.0477 (on site in Washington, DC)

Jeff Conant, Communications Director, Global Justice Ecology Project, +1.575.770.2829

Joaquin Sanchez, CrossRoots, +1 917.575.3154

###

Notes to Editors

[1] World Bank Forests and Forestry Issue Brief: http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/NEWS/0,,contentMDK:20103458~menuPK:34480~pagePK:34370~piPK:34424~theSitePK:4607,00.html

[2] “Turning the Lacandon Jungle Over to the Carbon Market,” Z Magazine, July 2011: http://www.zcommunications.org/turning-the-lacandon-jungle-over-to-the-carbon-market-by-jeff-conant

[3] The California Report: AB32 and Environmentalists: http://www.californiareport.org/archive/R201103220850/a

[4] 2011 Center for International Forestry Resarch (CIFOR) report: Community managed forests and forest protected areas: An assessment of their conservation effectiveness across the tropics

[5] The World Bank maintains three roles in the Forest Carbon Partnership Facility.  It is one of the main international climate initiatives set up to fund developing country REDD schemes.

[6] http://noredd.makenoise.org/

[7] http://nogetrees.org/

 

Para publicación inmediata

21 septiembre, 2011

Esquemas de carbono forestal del Banco Mundial acusados de adelantar la contaminación en el Norte Global, desplazando a las comunidades en el Sur Global

Washington, DC – Mientras el Banco Mundial, que es la mayor fuente de financiamiento multilateral para proyectos forestales, [1] se prepara para tener sus reuniones de otoño, el Proyecto por la Justicia Ecológica Global (Global Justice Ecology Project) acusa que la promocion por esta institución de la controversial plan conocido como REDD (Reducción de Emisiones por Deforestación y Degradación) esta perjudicando tanto a los bosques y las comunidades dependientes de los bosques en los países en desarrollo, y fomentando al mismo tiempo la contaminación continua en las comunidades más vulnerables en los países desarrollados como los EE.UU.

Tras el anuncio de un nuevo acuerdo sub-nacional de REDD entre los estados de California, EEUU, Chiapas, México y Acre, Brasil, durante la Conferencia Climática de la ONU en Cancún en diciembre pasado, el Proyecto por la Justicia Ecológica Global (GJEP) inició una investigación sobre los impactos potenciales y actuales de REDD. En marzo y abril del 2011, GJEP viajó a Chiapas para investigar los impactos sociales y ecológicos del proyecto REDD, que está siendo diseñado para crear créditos de compensación de carbono mediante la cuantificación del carbono almacenado por los árboles en la Reserva de la Biosfera Montes Azules en la Selva Lacandona.

“Durante nuestra investigación fuimos a la comunidad de Amador Hernández, en la selva profunda”, dijo Orin Langelle, del Proyecto por la Justicia Ecológica Global. “Los aldeanos nos informaron de que el gobierno mexicano está utilizando la retención de servicios médicos como un medio para presionarlos para que abandonen sus tierras. Tienen miedo de que al negarse abandonar sus tierras los militares mexicanos les obliguen a salir por la fuerza, como ha sucedido con otras comunidades indígenas en la selva Lacandona. “[2]

Grupos de justicia ambiental también advierten que el acuerdo REDD tendrá un impacto negativo en la población de California. “La compensación de carbono a partir de este acuerdo REDD va a seguir permitiendo la contaminación de comunidades como Richmond y Wilmington, California, causadas por refinerías de petróleo como Chevron y Tesoro”, dijo Joaquín Quetzal Sánchez, estratega basado en Oakland, California y parte del grupo CrossRoots: Construyendo un Movimiento Sostenible.

“Este acuerdo de REDD dañará las comunidades en ambos lados de la frontera. Los únicos que ganan son los que contaminan”, dijo Sánchez [3]

En octubre, GJEP viajará a Acre, Brasil, para reunirse con los grupos interesados ​​en el proyecto REDD en ese lugar y para documentar los impactos reales y potenciales del proyecto. GJEP planea traer a representantes de Chiapas a este encuentro para crear nuevas oportunidades y establecer estrategias transfronterizas en relación con el acuerdo sobre REDD en California-Chiapas-Acre.
La idea de “proteger los bosques” mediante la expulsión de las comunidades que dependen de ellos contradice estudios recientes que demuestran que los bosques están mejor protegidos cuando aquellas comunidades que dependen de ellos tienen títulos de propiedad. En un estudio de seis años, el CIFOR (Centro para la Investigación Forestal Internacional) encontró que, “Los bosques tropicales designados como áreas de protección tienen las tasas anuales de deforestación mucho más altas que aquellas administradas por las comunidades locales” [4]

El Banco Mundial ha estado involucrado en el programa global forestal/climático conocido como REDD a través de su “Forest Carbon Partnership Facility” [5], anunciado por el presidente del Banco Mundial Robet Zoellick, durante la Conferencia Climática de la ONU en 2007 en Bali, Indonesia. El anuncio fue recibido con fuertes protestas populares, el Banco Mundial continúa atrayendo duras críticas por su papel en la promoción de esquemas que desplazan a las comunidades dependientes de los bosques y al mismo tiempo promover grandes plantaciones industriales de árboles que podrían afectar socialmente y ecológicamente por este tipo de árboles genéticamente modificados. [6] [7]

Hoy es el Día Internacional de Acción Contra los “Monocultivos” de Árboles. GJEP publicó el año pasado este video destacando su preocupación por las plantaciones de árboles y árboles de ingeniería genética.

Contactos:

Anne Petermann, Directora Ejecutiva, Proyecto por la Justicia Ecológica Global; North American Focal Point, Global Forest Coalition +1.802.578.0477 (localizada en Washington, DC)

Jeff Conant, Director de Comunicación, Proyecto por la Justicia Ecológica Global, +1.575.770.2829

Joaquín Sanchez, CrossRoots, +1.917.575.3154

###

Notas:

[1] World Bank Forests and Forestry Issue Brief: http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/NEWS/0,,contentMDK:20103458~menuPK:34480~pagePK:34370~piPK:34424~theSitePK:4607,00.html

[2] “Turning the Lacandon Jungle Over to the Carbon Market,” Z Magazine, July 2011: http://www.zcommunications.org/turning-the-lacandon-jungle-over-to-the-carbon-market-by-jeff-conant

[3] The California Report: AB32 and Environmentalists: http://www.californiareport.org/archive/R201103220850/a

[4] 2011 Center for International Forestry Resarch (CIFOR) report: Community managed forests and forest protected areas: An assessment of their conservation effectiveness across the tropics

[5] The World Bank maintains three roles in the Forest Carbon Partnership Facility.  It is one of the main international climate initiatives set up to fund developing country REDD schemes.

[6] http://noredd.makenoise.org/

[7] http://nogetrees.org/

Comments Off on World Bank Forest Carbon Schemes Charged with Displacing Communities in the Global South, Furthering Pollution in the Global North

Filed under Biodiversity, Carbon Trading, Chiapas, Climate Change, Climate Justice, GE Trees, Indigenous Peoples, REDD

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , ,

by | 2011-09-20 · 22:50

Video: September 21st – International Day Against Tree Monocultures!

Note: We released this short 5 minute video on the International Day Against Monoculture Tree Plantations in 2010, but it is as relevant now as it was then.  We dedicate it in the memory of World Rainforest Movement’s Ricardo Carrere, a friend and great leader in the struggle to protect the world’s forests.  ¡Ricardo Carrere Presente!

–The GJEP Team

Southern U.S. States Targeted for Genetically Engineered Tree Plantations

United States–Today is the International Day Against Tree Monocultures [1]. Across the globe, timber plantations are wreaking havoc on forests and forest dependent communities.  Now, to further exacerbate this damage, genetically engineered trees (or GE trees) pose a new and unprecedented threat.

The Dogwood Alliance’s Executive Director, Danna Smith said, “The USDA recently approved a request by GE tree company ArborGen, headquartered in South Carolina, to plant over a quarter of a million genetically engineered eucalyptus trees across Florida, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Texas and South Carolina, —many of the same regions still trying to recover from Hurricane Katrina and the Gulf oil spill.  This would be another disaster for the region.”

Like kudzu, eucalyptus trees are wildly invasive, and spread into native ecosystems, displacing wildlife. Additionally, the oil in these eucalyptus trees is extremely flammable. California spends millions each year to eradicate invasive eucalyptus because of the threat of wildfires.  In 2009 over 200 people were killed in Australia in a firestorm fuelled by eucalyptus.  It was the worst fire in the country’s history.

On July 1, 2010 Global Justice Ecology Project, Dogwood Alliance, Sierra Club, Center for Biological Diversity, Center for Food Safety, and the International Center for Technology Assessment filed a lawsuit to stop ArborGen’s GE eucalyptus due to their potential impacts [2].

“It’s time for people to understand that GE trees must be banned and that plantations are not forests,” remarked Orin Langelle, Global Justice Ecology Project Co-Director/Strategist.

NOTES to Editors: [1] In 2004, September 21st was declared the International Day Against Tree Monocultures by organizations throughout the world. On this day, people in every continent carry out actions to generate awareness about the impacts of large scale tree monocultures on communities and their environments. For more info, see www.wrm.org.uy

[2]  For background on the lawsuit click here.

Click here to sign the petition to stop genetically engineered trees!

Comments Off on Video: September 21st – International Day Against Tree Monocultures!

Filed under Climate Justice, GE Trees, Genetic Engineering

Tagged as , , , , , , , ,

by | 2011-09-16 · 14:55

Earth Minute Radio Segment on Blood Tribe Blockade

Global Justice Ecology Project partners with Margaret Prescod’s Sojourner Truth show on KPFK–Pacifica Los Angeles radio show for a weekly Earth Minute on Tuesdays and a weekly 12 minute Environment Segment every Thursday.

This week’s Earth Minute covered a blockade by women members of the Blood Tribe in southern Alberta against the construction of a fracking operation.  To listen to the show, go to: http://bit.ly/pF8o19

Text of the Earth Minute:

Late last week, women members of the Blood Tribe in southern Alberta blockaded a fracking operation run by Murphy Oil on the Blood tribe reserve. They were arrested, charged with trespass (on their own land) and fined $1,500.

They point out that Blood Tribe members were NOT consulted during the negotiations of this deal, and that the fracking poses a major threat to human health, wildlife and livestock, and irreversible damage to the land and water on the Blood Reserve.

The women explained their action: “After nearly a year of doing everything in our power to stop fracking from occurring on our land, we felt time was no longer on our side.  With the imminent threat of fracking about to begin on Blood Tribe land, we decided we had to act immediately.”

“For us, this place is more than just land; it is the place that has given life to our people since time immemorial. Our culture, our language, our identity comes from the land and it is to the land that we owe our very existence.  This land is our mother and we must always respect that.”

For the Earth Minute and the Sojourner Truth show, this is Anne Petermann from Global Justice Ecology Project.

Comments Off on Earth Minute Radio Segment on Blood Tribe Blockade

Filed under Climate Change

by | · 12:58

KPFK Environment Segment: Historic Texas Wildfires Linked to Climate Change

Global Justice Ecology Project partners with Margaret Prescod’s Sojourner Truth show on KPFK–Pacifica Los Angeles radio show for a weekly Earth Minute on Tuesdays and a weekly 12 minute Environment Segment every Thursday.

This Week’s Environment Segment  addressed the massive and historic wildfires burning in Texas.  Dr. Neil Carman, a scientist with the Lone Star Chapter of the Sierra Club was the guest speaker.

To listen to the Environment Segment, click here and scroll to minute 45:55.

Comments Off on KPFK Environment Segment: Historic Texas Wildfires Linked to Climate Change

Filed under Climate Change

by | 2011-09-15 · 13:53

Sustainable Forestry Initiative Conference Protested in Burlington, VT (Op-Ed and Photos)

by Anne Petermann, Global Justice Ecology Project Executive Director

What follows is a series of photos along with an Op-Ed that I wrote for the Burlington Free Press–the Gannett-owned statewide newspaper of Vermont.  The Op-Ed (which has not yet been published) addresses the Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI) conference that came to Burlington this week, to much rancor from students at the University of Vermont.  The UVM students were mobilized to protest SFI’s bogus forest certification program by Adam Gaya, an organizer with ForestEthics.  They were joined by numerous residents of Vermont, as well as participants from Massachusetts and Maine.  All of the photos below are taken by Anne Petermann, with the exception of two photos which were taken by GJEP Co-Director/Strategist Orin Langelle.

Op-ED: Vermont is the Green Mountain State, not the Brown Mountain State–let’s keep it that way.

Regrown forest in Vermont near Camel's Hump. The SFI wants to certify as sustainable the large-scale logging of native forests to produce electricity. Photo: Petermann/GJEP

Vermont is a success story of forest regeneration.  In the mid-1800s, the state had lost about 80% of its forest.  Moose, songbirds and many other wild creatures vanished.  Today, much of that forest has regrown.  The state is now 80% forested and the moose have returned to Vermont once more.

I find it quite ironic, therefore, that the Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI) chose to bring its phony, timber industry-controlled forest-destroying “certification” conference to Burlington.

Why is it phony?  The SFI was founded by and is funded by the very timber industry it is supposed to watchdog.  It is the proverbial fox guarding the henhouse.  It’s purpose: make the large-scale deforestation activities of the biggest timber companies on the planet appear “green” by certifying them as “sustainable.”

Since 2004, SFI has conducted 543 audits of its “certified” companies to measure their compliance with SFI standards. Not one audit found any problems with the large-scale timber operations and clearcuts.

In one recent instance, two SFI-accredited auditors spent a mere five days assessing more than 46,875 square miles of public forest — an area larger than the entire state of Pennsylvania. Naturally, they reported no violations of SFI standards and found nothing wrong.

If you aren’t looking for problems, you won’t find them, and SFI are masters at not finding problems.  It is for this reason that the SFI certification seal cannot be trusted— whether office paper, envelopes or catalogs—their ‘green’ label is meaningless.

If we want to protect forests, and promote truly sustainable management of forests, then we must view SFI as greenwash, and a threat to forests and the people who depend on them.

SFI certifies hundreds of thousands of acres of forest across our region, and while they would like us to believe that these forests are well cared for, the fact is that they are as vulnerable as ever.  Plum Creek, one of the biggest participants in SFI’s certification scheme, owns nearly one million acres of timberland across Maine, Vermont and New Hampshire – and uses large-scale clearcutting and other destructive industrial logging practices.  Yet this rampant devastation is certified as ‘green’ by the SFI.  And guess what?  Plum Creek’s CEO sits on SFI’s board.

SFI protest in front of the Hilton where the SFI conference was occurring. Photo: Langelle/GJEP

SFI’s weak standards also allow other industrial logging practices that have resulted in landslides, widespread toxic chemical use and dangerous impacts to sensitive species.  In the future, SFI would even like to certify trees that have been genetically engineered–despite the fact that the public is overwhelming opposed to these dangerous Franken-trees.  If genetically engineered tree plantations are developed, the escape of pollen and/or seeds from them into native forests would be inevitable, irreversible and cause tremendous damage to forests.  To SFI and their corporate sponsors, however, GE trees mean enhanced profits and should therefore be certified.  Fortunately, we do not yet have GE tree plantations, so there is still time to stop this disaster.

For these and many other reasons, twenty environmental groups recently sent a letter to SFI demanding that the organization stop certifying destruction of forests as “sustainable.”  There are also several major U.S. companies – including Sprint, Allstate and Office Depot – that are disassociating themselves from the SFI.

Protester agrees to be "greenwashed" at the SFI protest. Photo: Petermann/GJEP

Meanwhile, the SFI continues to greenwash the products of forest destruction in order to intentionally confuse people who are truly concerned about the environment and want to make the right choices.

We Vermonters love our Green Mountains and want them to stay green–not blotched with clearcuts certified by SFI–which also is important as forests play a key role in stabilizing the climate.  And as we have seen with so much severe weather in Vermont this year, stabilizing the climate is more important than ever.

So, say no to SFI-certified greenwash products.  Say yes to truly sustainable, local, small-scale forestry.  Our forests are a treasure.

Let’s keep them that way.

Following are some additional photos from the protest:

Adam Gaya of ForestEthics speaks in front of the Hilton. Photo: Petermann/GJEP

Kate Kroll of the University of Vermont recites the crimes of the SFI. Photo: Petermann/GJEP

Brian Tokar, who teaches at the University of Vermont,riles up the crowd. Photo: Petermann/GJEP

Anne Petermann of Global Justice Ecology Project denounces the forest criminals meeting in the Hilton. Photo: Langelle/GJEP

SFI conference participant heckles the protest but is drowned out by loud chants. Photo: Petermann/GJEP

Protesters raise the volume. Photo: Petermann/GJEP

The SFI is seeking ways to make genetically engineered trees certifiable as "sustainable." Photo: Petermann/GJEP

Another victim of "greenwashing." Photo: Petermann/GJEP

As delegates begin to emerge from the conference, protesters get rowdy. Photo: Petermann/GJEP

Comments Off on Sustainable Forestry Initiative Conference Protested in Burlington, VT (Op-Ed and Photos)

Filed under Actions / Protest, Climate Change, Energy, False Solutions to Climate Change, GE Trees, Posts from Anne Petermann

Tagged as , , , , , , ,

by | 2011-09-14 · 13:35

Texas wildfires: More evidence of climate change

Note:  We have been following the Texas wildfires for quite sometime.  Tomorrow, September 15, Dr. Neil Carmen from the Texas Sierra Club will be interviewed on Los Angeles’ KPFK radio’s  Sojourner Truth with Margaret Prescott to speak on the devastation that is happening in Texas.  We will rebroadcast the interview here on this blog, but you can listen live tomorrow at 7 am Pacific/10 pm Eastern/14:00 GMT.

Dr. Carman is a plant scientist with a background in plant genetics.    Since 1996, he has been speaking and writing extensively on the potential biological hazards of genetic engineering to both the public and policy makers.   He works for the Sierra Club on air quality issues in Texas, and has helped stop several coal-fired power plants. He is also a volunteer scientist with the Sierra Club’s national Genetic Engineering committee and is a Steering Committee member of the STOP GE trees Campaign.

-The GJEP Team

Cross-posted from the Baker Institute Blog.  Insight an analysis from the James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy at Rice University.    (Photo below from ego TV )

Six of the 10 largest wildfires in Texas history occurred  in 2011. This year’s wildfire in Bastrop County set a  somber state record for destruction: the highest number  of homes lost in a single fire in Texas history.

Although it’s too soon to determine the total amount of  insured property losses caused by Texas wildfires,2011  is projected to be the worst in state history according to  a spokesperson of the Insurance Council of Texas. The  cost may exceed $150 million. The previous cost record  was set in 2009, when fires caused more than $100  million in insured property damages statewide. In fact,  Texas is currently dealing with its third yearlong  wildfire season since 2005 — and its most severe.  Others were in 2008 and 2009.

No one can dispute that the Texas wildfire epidemic of  the past six years, culminating in the most severe this

year, is very closely related to the extreme heat and drought that have been plaguing Texas. And the changing Texas climate is not an isolated phenomenon. Extreme climatic events are becoming the order of the day around the world. For examples, most of North America has been experiencing more unusually hot days and nights, fewer unusually cold days and nights, and fewer frost days.

Heavy downpours have become more frequent and intense. Droughts are becoming more severe in some regions, though there are no clear patterns for the globe as a whole. The power and frequency of Atlantic hurricanes have increased substantially. Outside the tropics, storm tracks are shifting northward and the strongest storms are becoming even stronger.

It is folly to attribute an extreme climate event such as the current severe drought in Texas to any single particular cause. However, increased greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide in the atmosphere definitely cause an increase in the heat energy and water vapor content of the atmosphere, thereby increasing the probability of an extreme climate response. Carbon dioxide occurs naturally in the atmosphere and is necessary for life. However, the increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide that we are experiencing now is directly ascribable to human activities. There is enough of this greenhouse gas to account for the changes we are seeing in extreme climate events.

To make a point, I remind you that the global atmosphere contains substantially more carbon by weight (one and a half times as much) than do all of the trees, grass and all other terrestrial plants and animals in the world!

Local weather patterns are generated by energy and water vapor as they are carried around the globe embedded in moving air masses. It is the dynamics of the global distribution in these quantities that determine our climate and weather. Perturbing these movements by changing the composition of the atmosphere by the introduction of greenhouse gases may lead to extreme climatic conditions in different parts of the world, such as the extreme drought and intense wildfires that we are now experiencing in Texas.

It is time to wake up to the fact that our home the Earth is changing, and changing at a rapid rate because of what we as humans are doing.

Ronald L. Sass, Ph.D., is the fellow in global climate change at the Baker Institute and the Harry C. and Olga K. Wiess Professor Emeritus of Natural Sciences at Rice University. Now retired, he joined the Rice faculty in 1958 and served as chairman of the Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Department.

Comments Off on Texas wildfires: More evidence of climate change

Filed under Climate Change

Tagged as , ,

by | 2011-09-13 · 19:15

Jeff Conant on KPFA’s Against the Grain Today

Following on the publicationof his article Do Trees Grow on Money in Earth Island Journal this month (with photos by Orin Langelle), GJEP Communications Director Jeff Conant was invited to appear on KPFA’s show Against the Grain today, to speak about REDD (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation). Listen to the broadcast, here.

Comments Off on Jeff Conant on KPFA’s Against the Grain Today

Filed under Chiapas, False Solutions to Climate Change, Green Economy, REDD