Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Implications of the new Forest Code

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Implications of the new Forest Code

    AZG Armenian Daily #090, 20/05/2005


    Armenian forests

    IMPLICATIONS OF THE NEW FOREST CODE

    Part One: Protect Our Forests

    Note: this is the first of three columns focusing on key points of the new
    draft forest code and its implications for Armenia's threatened forests.

    Armenia's endangered forests

    Last week a series of discussions began in Yerevan focusing on the draft new
    forest code. These discussions, organized by Armenian Forests NGO with the
    support of Open Society Institute public policy formation grant, seek to
    engage key NGOs and others in the realization of this proposed Code and
    related implementation. These discussions are timed to prepare for the
    expected introduction of the draft code to Parliament later this spring.

    For those who may not be aware, the destruction of the forests in Armenia is
    reaching tragic levels. Although forests historically covered approximately
    40-45% of current territory of Armenia and even the early 20th century it
    was 25%, forests now only cover about 8-9% of the Republic of Armenia. Loss
    of forests brings problems of soil erosion, landslides, loss of springs and
    rivers, loss of fruits and other forest products, greater weather damage,
    loss of productive soil, loss of biodiversity, loss of sensitive animal
    habitat and additional problems. Although some of the greatest loss occurred
    during the energy crisis, the cutting and devastation still continue at
    alarming rates. According to expert estimates, at current rates of
    destruction Armenian forests could be destroyed within 20 years.

    In Soviet times and since then, Armenia's forests have had protective status
    in that there is no legal cutting except sanitary cutting intended only to
    cover getting the dead trees out of the forests and care cutting (select
    thinning) to improve the health of the forest. However, under the guise of
    "sanitary cutting" mass cutting is carried out mostly by illegal business
    operations supplying wood for internal fuel needs, furniture, construction
    and sending the best, most valuable trees to other countries.

    During Soviet times, the government planted up to 7,000 hectares of forests
    each year and imported wood (from Russia and other places) to meet needs
    within Armenia. Unfortunately, there has been almost no reforestation since
    1991 and there is very little import of wood while the cutting has increased
    dramatically.

    Why a new forest code?

    The current code is not bad, but needs some updating to reflect the current
    situation and it was significant enough that it made more sense to develop a
    whole new code. This has been a long process managed by FISP (Forest
    Institutional Support Program), a group funded by the Swedish SIDA, under
    the World Bank Natural Resources Management and Poverty Reduction Program.
    Nazeli Vardanyan, an environmental attorney and director of Armenian Forests
    NGO has been one of the lead people in facilitating this in-depth process
    and developing the code with other local and foreign experts over the last
    18 months.

    The forests should remain under the ownership of Armenia's people

    Among one of the key provisions that should remain in the code through the
    Parliamentary process is the provision of ownership. Armenia's forests are
    here for the benefit of current and future generations. To that end,
    Armenia's forests have been and should always remain the property of the
    state as guardians for the people and never be privatized. The Minister of
    Agriculture, David Lokyan, who is the lead minister for this code and the
    World Bank, which is responsible for the project that has developed this
    draft code, are adamant that privatization of Armenia's forests should not
    be allowed; however, there are others who would love to buy forest land, cut
    the trees, build their mansions, fence it off for their own use.

    We have only to look at other examples of countries that have gone this
    route to the destruction of their forests to see what a disaster this would
    be for Armenia. Upon analyzing the impact of privatization in Central and
    Eastern European countries, an FAO report (Issues and Opportunities in the
    Evolution of Private Forestry and Forestry Extension in Several Countries
    with Economies in Transition in Central and Eastern Europe) sites extensive
    problems with management of private forest areas and recommends against this
    direction for CEE countries.

    Armenia's forests are in a precarious position; hopefully this series of
    workshops and media coverage of these issues will help encourage people to
    be more engaged in the protection of the forest resources of Armenia. If we
    expect the forests to be here for the next generation of Armenia's children,
    Parliament should maintain the provision that maintains forests as state
    property.

    Part Two: What Will Our Grandchildren Say?

    "We have inherited the nature from our ancestors to preserve and pass on to
    our future generations."

    --Armenian proverb

    Is this the framework by which Armenia is treating its forests?

    When the illegal business operation cuts 80-100 year old trees and leaves
    bare hillsides behind to erode, like so many areas in Armenia, are they
    acting in the best interest of their grandchildren's generation, or even
    their son's and daughter's? Hardly.

    This column will briefly explore two key aspects of the draft forest code
    and related laws; namely sustainable management and the flow of trees across
    our borders.

    Managing the forests, ensuring a future

    Armenia's forests are suffering from shortsightedness. This is not to blame
    people for cutting trees to keep their family from freezing in the
    winter-any of us would do so if needed. However, those who have choices
    (such as those running and profiting from the illegal cutting operations)
    are doing what may seem to be in their short-term interest, but at the
    expense of not only everyone else but their own long-term interests. We
    cannot, as the saying goes, see the forests for the trees. In the attempt by
    a few rich people to further fill their pockets today, the forests,
    biodiversity, habitat and not least Armenia's people are suffering-and will
    continue to do so for generations.

    Armenia must immediately move to practices of sustainable forest management
    as well as mass reforestation to begin to stem the tide of destruction. We
    are hopeful that this code, if properly enacted and enforced, will help
    support such a change; but the leadership and citizens alike must make it
    so.

    Is it possible for Armenia to have productive-cutting for commercial uses
    like construction and furniture-forests while restoring the forests? The
    answer remains to be seen, but it certainly is the case in other countries.
    To do so requires proper management. It is clear that the forests have not
    been managed well, barely at all, since Soviet times. It is theoretically
    possible to identify and allow proper, controlled, sustainable cutting the
    less sensitive areas of forests where harvesting will cause minimal
    disruption while prohibiting cutting in the most sensitive areas such as
    those where the slope is very steep (prone to erosion) or particularly
    delicate biodiversity areas.

    Parallel mass reforestation must be made a high priority in order to begin
    to repair the damage done by over a decade of abuse, mismanagement,
    corruption and need-based cutting. Nurseries must be established,
    cultivation of high quality trees must be undertaken, forests planted and
    cared for, dry or eroded land must be reclaimed to reverse the trend of
    desertification as has impoverished so much land in Armenia.

    Exporting our valuable forests

    Another example of shortsightedness and pure greed in the forest sector is
    the situation of mass export of large, valuable trees to other countries. In
    Soviet times (and technically still on paper, though not in practice)
    Armenia forests were considered under "protective" status and there was no
    productive cutting for internal uses let alone external uses. That has all
    changed; now not only are people over-cutting Armenia's forests to meet
    internal demand and make furniture for export, but a few wealthy people
    taking advantage of the corrupt, non-existent enforcement of laws to again
    fill their pockets by cutting and selling Armenia's most valuable trees as
    whole logs to Iran, Spain, Italy, Germany and even Turkey.

    One may rationalize destruction of forests for internal needs based on a
    poor economic situation and the lack of affordable alternative fuels, but
    such destruction purely for the gain of a few is inexcusable. These people
    are in essence stealing our grandchildren's property.

    Unfortunately besides the corruption and greed, there is a policy that
    supports such destruction. Namely that for import of wood-something that
    Armenia needs to protect the remaining forests-there are both taxes and
    customs fees making it prohibitively more expensive. Adding to the
    imbalance, exports of wood are charged neither taxes nor customs fees. This
    unfortunately increases the incentive to cut more forests for export. At the
    very least, this must be reversed to allow more incentives for import and
    disincentives for export.

    Armenian Forests NGO among organizations seeks to include such an amendment
    to the tax law and customs code as part of the forest code package.

    If Armenia really does have sufficient forest resources to allow for export,
    one related positive step that could be taken is to develop properly managed
    "certified" forests. In this way the products could be "certified" by a
    recognized third party as harvested in a sustainable manner. This would
    thereby not only support the protection of our forests, but enable Armenia's
    trees to command much higher prices on the world market.

    Another way to look at it is to see that the forests belong not to us but to
    our grandchildren and their grandchildren. Forests are the cornerstones of
    our ecosystem and support fragile biodiversity and animal habitat, and
    moderate the microclimate, protect the soil, and clean the air. We must be
    thinking, feeling and most importantly, acting with a view to the future. As
    much trouble as it may seem to stop the mass destruction of the forests, it
    is much more costly to try to repair the damage later.

    Armenia must immediately implement an effective process of sustainable
    management and restoration of its forests. Armenia should not be exporting
    its scare, valuable forest wood to countries that have richer forests than
    Armenia; at a minimum, Armenia should establish incentives for import and
    disincentives for export of wood. These measures should be adopted by
    Parliament and enacted by law, but will take the concerted will and effort
    of all levels of society to carry them out. From the President to
    Parliament, to marzpets and village mayors, to villagers and Yerevan
    residents; the commitment must be borne by everyone.

    Part Three: Making it Real; Making it Work, Now

    Mass deforestation in Armenia is being driven by a combination of factors
    including poverty, lack of affordable alternative energy, corruption and
    shortsighted mentality. These are significant issues that feed on each other
    and exacerbate the destruction of forests. However, gains in these areas due
    to other efforts (such as improving the economy, implementing the rule of
    law and cracking down on corruption) will also have payoffs for the forest
    sector.

    In this context, the new forest code has been drafted and will be submitted
    to the Parliament later this spring or in the fall. Although it is not a
    "silver bullet" it could be an effective tool to bring about positive
    changes for the dwindling forests of Armenia.

    Parliament's responsibility

    A tremendous amount of work has gone into developing the current new draft
    forest code (and related legislation on exports and imports of wood) aimed
    at helping improve the forests of Armenia. However, the best draft code will
    not have a chance of bringing any positive change to forest problems unless
    its provisions are maintained through the Parliamentary process and signed
    into law.

    There are likely to be pressures within the Parliament to gut or change
    certain key provisions of the code before it becomes law. The important next
    steps must include local citizens, NGO's, international organizations, and
    donor organizations (not the least of which are the World Bank and Swedish
    SIDA who are funding the project dealing with this new code). We must convey
    to members of Parliament and the President the need to pass this new code
    and related legislation intact. We hope they will take this responsibility
    seriously and do the right thing for current and future generations.

    The critical details

    The current forest code, which is still in force until a new one replaces
    it, is not so bad. However, although it was passed in 1994, the vast
    majority of the regulations (also referred to here as "bylaws") were never
    adopted. Unfortunately, regulations-which describe how the law will be
    carried out and by whom-are required to implement the law. Without them,
    there are no directions to for the bodies to be able to enforce the law. It
    is like a car that has a destination but no driver and no road to get there.

    Once the new code is adopted as law, the regulations must be finalized and
    also adopted as quickly as reasonably possible. We should not accept excuses
    that aim to needlessly delay this critical step.

    Enforcement is the key

    Many officials point to the poor economic situation of villagers and try to
    pretend that the villagers are the ones to blame for cutting the forests. In
    fact, villagers pulling branches and small trees from the forest by hand or
    donkey (although certainly a factor) are a fairly small fraction of the
    whole problem. In this case, the real villains are the businessmen who are
    bribing local officials to look the other way while they take out the large,
    valuable trees by the truckloads for sale in and out of Armenia. In some
    cases they are even making new roads to access the more remote forests.

    It is no secret that Armenia's laws are not generally well enforced, but
    steps must be taken to immediately curb the corruption and rampant theft of
    forests if we expect forests to remain for our grandchildren.

    The other thing some officials say to disguise the truth of this ongoing
    destruction is to talk about the past with phrases like "Armenia experienced
    extensive over-cutting of forests during the energy crisis in the early
    90's." The reality is that although some of the greatest loss occurred
    during the energy crisis, the cutting and devastation still continue at
    alarming rates. In fact, the cutting that occurred at that point, although
    it was significant, was purely need-based. Now, unfortunately, a few are
    making a big business of cutting forests for their personal gain.

    The single most important aspect of all of this is that THERE MUST BE PROPER
    ENFORCEMENT OF THE LAW. Without proper enforcement the forests will continue
    to be destroyed.

    For proper enforcement to happen several factors must be in place. First
    there must be the political will among officials at all levels to make sure
    the law is followed. Second, the public, NGO's, international organizations,
    media, and others must be engaged and help create the political will for
    enforcement to take place. Steps must be taken to develop effective means of
    enforcement and to weed out corruption. The regulations should make it easy
    to do the right thing and difficult to do the wrong thing-not the other way
    around.

    It will not be an easy road, but the new code and related regulations once
    adopted, MUST BE ENFORCED-PERIOD.

    In conclusion, Armenia's forests are at a critical juncture. Forests now
    cover only 8-9 percent of the country and the forests that remain are in
    relatively poor condition. As a result, great areas of Armenia are beginning
    to suffer due to erosion, drying of springs and rivers, loss of
    biodiversity, loss of animal habitat, desertification and other problems.
    Given the fragile state of the forests here and the immense destruction that
    is currently underway, this situation demands to be resolved.

    The new forest code and related regulations could be an effective tool to
    protect and restore the forests, but the commitment to follow and enforce
    the law must be there. This is a commitment that must be borne by all
    sectors of society from the local villagers, to NGO's, to businesses, to
    local officials, to the highest levels of government. We must act quickly
    and with firm resolve to get this new code enacted, adopt effective
    regulations and to make sure it is effectively enforced. Only then will our
    grandchildren have a chance of inheriting any forests.

    For more information or to get a electronic copy of the draft code and
    related documents, please email Armenian Forests NGO at
    [email protected].

    By Jeffrey Tufenkian, co-founder and president of Armenian Forests NGO
    focusing on actions to restore and protect Armenia's forests for current and
    future generations. See www.ArmenianForests.am. He also is co-founder of
    Kanach Foundation, publisher of the Adventure Armenia: Hiking and Rock
    Climbing book (www.kanach.org).
Working...
X