Large concessions are managed on the principle of cyclic rotation
Kaieteur News, 12 July 2007
Dear Editor,
Janette Bulkan is at it again. Her last article in the letters' section
of the newspapers of July 10 “Concession holders who cannot operate
their forests should lose their grants, not be allowed to transfer them
without a competitive bidding process” is as repetitive, misinformed,
and hypocritical.
Janette Bulkan is neither a forester nor a logger.
Her lack of technical expertise is shown in previous statements which
are aimed at being sensational and have absolutely no scientific basis;
for example, her estimate that purpleheart makes up 1% of the standing
stock of Guyana's forest has no scientific basis.
In her last tirade, she continues to speak about landlordism and
illegal access of lands by Barama, and gives the impression that the
entire concessions are contracted out to Barama.
The public should be made aware that large concessions are managed on
the principle of cyclic rotation (usually 25 to 60 years); thus, if a
concession operates on a 60 year cycle, only 1/60th of the total
concession area is harvested in a calendar year. As such, if concession
A has an acreage of 300,000 hectares, and engages any company to do
contract operations, the maximum available acreage available to that
company will be 300,000/60 or 5,000 hectares.
The impression Bulkan gives is that all 300,000 hectares is available.
But, as mentioned before, she has no technical expertise in forestry
and her tirades are designed to be misleading in her narrow minded
vicious attack on the government, GFC, Barama, and the forest sector.
Bulkan continues her hypocritical attack on Barama, and accuses the
company of encouraging landlordism. The GFC has disputed this. In
previous tirades, Bulkan talks about “creaming” of the forest resources
and companies focusing only on a few prime species. How then does
Bulkan account for the fact that a particular wood working company
focuses primarily on one species for manufacturing namely Locust? Isn't
this encouraging “Creaming”?
Bulkan, also in another tirade, stated that exports of purpleheart logs
and other prime species stifle the local manufacturing (furniture)
sector. How then can she explain exporting large volumes of purpleheart
lumber by one particular company, instead of making same available to
local manufacturers?
The hypocrisy continues when she talks about incentives given to
foreign companies. Why single out foreign companies? Local firms are
also benefiting from significant incentive packages issued to them by
the same Government that she criticises.
Janette Bulkan talks about transparency and being above board. One of
the things that the GFC and Government should ask her is how was she
able to get access to the GFC Board documents which she quotes from,
and seems to have unhindered access to. As far as I know, Board
documents are confidential.
It is really unfortunate that she seeks to destroy a major sector of
the Country.
It is true that the GFC and Government have a lot more to do. But
credit must be given for the major strides that have been made to date.
If Bulkan has points and advice to offer the government and GFC, she
must find a better means of engagement than going to the press and bad
mouthing everyone. In the end, she is now exposed for her hypocritical
and anti-Guyanese stand.
She must seek advice before writing her tirades. For example, seeking
clarification would have educated her on the following:
The harvesting of various species has no relationship to the overall
national average standing stock. Species population varies form
location to location.
Thus production of various species and volume percentages would be
dependent on the species stocking in various localities.
The percentage volume of a particular species harvested is not
empirical evidence that the species is being depleted. Rather it is the
quality of the forest remaining after logging, including the presence
of smaller trees of any particular species, which would determine the
sustainability of any species.
All stakeholders in Guyana support the current concept of natural
regeneration. The GFC has systems in place to facilitate the natural
regeneration process.
This is embodied in numerous documents including the Code of Practice,
FPM Guidelines, Forest Plan, Forest Laws etc. Some specific
prescriptions facilitating natural regeneration and also to ensure
individual species are not mortally depleted include the diameter
limit, 10 meter rule, buffer zones, biodiversity reserves, seed trees,
restriction of felling in steep slopes, swamps etc.
Further, management level inventory and 100% inventory add a further
layer of accountability.
Every major initiative in Guyana pertaining to forestry including
environment, certification, illegal logging, etc. has been initiated by
GFC.
Work on sustainability, illegal logging, revision of laws, and
refinement of various prescriptions etc. are not static or come to an
end at a fixed time.
Rather, it is all part of a dynamic process of continuous review as new
information is gathered.
The various laws, regulations, codes, etc are all designed in keeping
with the reality of the situation based on wide stakeholder
consultation and not the fantasy of any one particular individual.
The forestry resources of Guyana are there to facilitate the
development of the country. It must be utilized but also generate
economic returns as well.
Some critics are not guided by reality but rather selfish personal
gains. Because of this they do not hesitate to malign their country or
countrymen.
Samantha Griffith
Kaieteur News, 12 July 2007
Dear Editor,
Janette Bulkan is at it again. Her last article in the letters' section
of the newspapers of July 10 “Concession holders who cannot operate
their forests should lose their grants, not be allowed to transfer them
without a competitive bidding process” is as repetitive, misinformed,
and hypocritical.
Janette Bulkan is neither a forester nor a logger.
Her lack of technical expertise is shown in previous statements which
are aimed at being sensational and have absolutely no scientific basis;
for example, her estimate that purpleheart makes up 1% of the standing
stock of Guyana's forest has no scientific basis.
In her last tirade, she continues to speak about landlordism and
illegal access of lands by Barama, and gives the impression that the
entire concessions are contracted out to Barama.
The public should be made aware that large concessions are managed on
the principle of cyclic rotation (usually 25 to 60 years); thus, if a
concession operates on a 60 year cycle, only 1/60th of the total
concession area is harvested in a calendar year. As such, if concession
A has an acreage of 300,000 hectares, and engages any company to do
contract operations, the maximum available acreage available to that
company will be 300,000/60 or 5,000 hectares.
The impression Bulkan gives is that all 300,000 hectares is available.
But, as mentioned before, she has no technical expertise in forestry
and her tirades are designed to be misleading in her narrow minded
vicious attack on the government, GFC, Barama, and the forest sector.
Bulkan continues her hypocritical attack on Barama, and accuses the
company of encouraging landlordism. The GFC has disputed this. In
previous tirades, Bulkan talks about “creaming” of the forest resources
and companies focusing only on a few prime species. How then does
Bulkan account for the fact that a particular wood working company
focuses primarily on one species for manufacturing namely Locust? Isn't
this encouraging “Creaming”?
Bulkan, also in another tirade, stated that exports of purpleheart logs
and other prime species stifle the local manufacturing (furniture)
sector. How then can she explain exporting large volumes of purpleheart
lumber by one particular company, instead of making same available to
local manufacturers?
The hypocrisy continues when she talks about incentives given to
foreign companies. Why single out foreign companies? Local firms are
also benefiting from significant incentive packages issued to them by
the same Government that she criticises.
Janette Bulkan talks about transparency and being above board. One of
the things that the GFC and Government should ask her is how was she
able to get access to the GFC Board documents which she quotes from,
and seems to have unhindered access to. As far as I know, Board
documents are confidential.
It is really unfortunate that she seeks to destroy a major sector of
the Country.
It is true that the GFC and Government have a lot more to do. But
credit must be given for the major strides that have been made to date.
If Bulkan has points and advice to offer the government and GFC, she
must find a better means of engagement than going to the press and bad
mouthing everyone. In the end, she is now exposed for her hypocritical
and anti-Guyanese stand.
She must seek advice before writing her tirades. For example, seeking
clarification would have educated her on the following:
The harvesting of various species has no relationship to the overall
national average standing stock. Species population varies form
location to location.
Thus production of various species and volume percentages would be
dependent on the species stocking in various localities.
The percentage volume of a particular species harvested is not
empirical evidence that the species is being depleted. Rather it is the
quality of the forest remaining after logging, including the presence
of smaller trees of any particular species, which would determine the
sustainability of any species.
All stakeholders in Guyana support the current concept of natural
regeneration. The GFC has systems in place to facilitate the natural
regeneration process.
This is embodied in numerous documents including the Code of Practice,
FPM Guidelines, Forest Plan, Forest Laws etc. Some specific
prescriptions facilitating natural regeneration and also to ensure
individual species are not mortally depleted include the diameter
limit, 10 meter rule, buffer zones, biodiversity reserves, seed trees,
restriction of felling in steep slopes, swamps etc.
Further, management level inventory and 100% inventory add a further
layer of accountability.
Every major initiative in Guyana pertaining to forestry including
environment, certification, illegal logging, etc. has been initiated by
GFC.
Work on sustainability, illegal logging, revision of laws, and
refinement of various prescriptions etc. are not static or come to an
end at a fixed time.
Rather, it is all part of a dynamic process of continuous review as new
information is gathered.
The various laws, regulations, codes, etc are all designed in keeping
with the reality of the situation based on wide stakeholder
consultation and not the fantasy of any one particular individual.
The forestry resources of Guyana are there to facilitate the
development of the country. It must be utilized but also generate
economic returns as well.
Some critics are not guided by reality but rather selfish personal
gains. Because of this they do not hesitate to malign their country or
countrymen.
Samantha Griffith
Please Email Comments to guyanaforestryblog@gmail.com
1 comment:
I have seen this whole information regarding large concessions is managed on the principle of cyclic rotation. This post is very useful for all people who are connected with cyclic rotation.
managed it company london
Post a Comment