More on Barama

Barama came in at a time when investment was badly needed and has been in the vanguard of sustainable forest management
Saturday, December 16th 2006
Dear Editor,

I refer to a letter by Selochan Beharry captioned "Barama's alleged generosity needs to be carefully examined" (06.12.02).

The contents of his letter consist of outdated information and grievances which were all dealt with a long time ago by the Barama Company.

Why are Mr. Beharry and his friends in the Guyana Citizens Initiative (GCI) rehashing the past? I do not think that the spate of letters in the Stabroek News quite recently is fair as regards Barama's forest operations here in Guyana. Further I do not think Barama's detractors or critics are professionally qualified to make an objective analysis of Barama's operations. While Mr. Beharry condemns the Barama Company's operations in Guyana he did not comment on the destruction of our commercial forests by our own local logging companies with their unsustainable forest harvesting methods.

I ask Mr. Beharry this question, which local logging company destroyed the commercial forest in the Kwebanna Amerindian village of Region No.1. Is it Asian Companies or local logging companies that continue to deplete commercial forests in the Amerindian communities of Bethany, Orealla and Siparuta, Wakapau, Manawarin and Cabacaburi. I would like Mr. Beharry to answer these questions before he makes further comments on the forestry sector.

The Barama company's contract to harvest in a sustainable manner the Baromalli forest type in its large concession was made possible under the Hoyte Administration at a time when Guyana was experiencing severe structural economic adjustments and unsubstantial foreign investments. In fact Guyana then was not a suitable destination for foreign investment. When Barama's contract was officially signed there was no opposition to it by the present day critics of Barama. As soon as the Hoyte Govern-ment was replaced by the PPP/C Government, opposition elements in the forestry sector in their bid to pressure the new Government decided to wage a campaign of hostility against the Barama Company. Today this campaign continues which was evident from the letters in the Stabroek News in preparation of the Forest Stewardship Council's (FSC) auditors visit to Guyana. Unfortunately for Barama's critics including Mr. Beharry their letters of venom had no effect or merit and in the final analysis Barama retained its FSC certificate which the critics wanted to be withdrawn.

The Barama Company's intervention in our forestry sector has significantly revolutionized this sector with its sustainable harvesting methods and good forestry management practices notwithstanding its large concession.

Mr. Beharry stated that Amerindian lands were ruthlessly taken away from them by Barama when the company first set up operations at Port Kaituma. This is a monumental lie meant to mislead the Guyanese public and the world at large. While in fact land space was needed and houses had to be removed this was done by way of a negotiation process and in an orderly fashion where compensation payments were made to affected residents.

The Regional Democratic Council (RDC) at that time being the legitimate governing body of Region No. 1 was given the responsibility of making compensation payments to affected residents who were not coerced into giving up their lands.

But many of us residents at Port Kaituma primarily Amerindians felt that Barama's presence at Port Kaituma was of divine intervention since Port Kaituma was transformed from a ghost town to an illuminated community.

Prior to Barama's intervention at Port Kaituma there was absolutely no economic activity taking place, employment in this sub region was very high, children had stopped attending school, teachers left the sub region because they were completely demoralized, the secondary school collapsed and worst of all there was no medical attention with the incidence of malaria taking its toll on residents.

With the arrival of Barama there was a complete transformation. Over 300 residents, primarily Amerindians, were given employment. Their children returned to school because their parents were now in a solid position to afford to send them to school, the school was made habitable by renovations, teachers were happy to return to teach and to enhance the teaching staff, Barama employed at their own expense foreign teachers. Barama also employed their clerical staff from Port Kaituma training them in computer technology and office practice making them proficient in the administrative office. The incidence of malaria was drastically lowered with a full time doctor working overtime in Amerindian communities such as Sebai taking blood samples for diagnostic tests and providing treatment. Medical attention was brought to Port Kaituma with the construction of a well equipped cottage hospital providing for the health needs of residents who once died of malaria, snake bites and other illnesses.

Barama's operations at Port Kaituma contributed to both direct and indirect employment, not only for Port Kaituma residents but also for those at the Mabaruma sub region including all the riverain communities. The company purchased the agricultural products of these residents and a market setting was established where the company's workers did their own purchasing. Many shops were also established transforming Port Kaituma into a hub of economic activities. Life was once again returned to Port Kaituma since the manganese days.

But unfortunately Barama had to relocate complying with its method of sustainable forest harvesting practices. What did Barama leave behind? A completed road way which resembled that of a highway, also other access roads also a well equipped cottage hospital which was handed over to the government and other buildings. But while the Barama Company contributed financially to the development of Port Kaituma, it was unfortunate that the Neighbourhood Democratic Council (NDC) did not at the time propose to the company a sound development programme for funding.

Barama's track record in terms of community transformation is an impressive one and being a resident of Port Kaituma and a witness I cannot say that the Barama Company is depleting Guyana's forest resource base, but rather it is in the vanguard of sustainable forest management in Guyana.

Yours faithfully,

Trevor Atkinson
Stabroek News