GuyanaForestryBlog

Surama chosen to film Riocochet's TV series "unbreakable"

2008-04-28T11:20:00.003-07:00

Surama chosen to film Riocochet's TV series "unbreakable"
Guyana Chronicle, 27 April 2008
http://www.guyanachronicle.com/news.html

THE indigenous tourism community, Surama has been chosen by Ricochet,
Britain's leading independent television company as one of the
locations for the filming of an adventure reality based survivor type
contest and TV series titled "Unbreakable" said the Guyana Tourism
Authority (GTA).

According to a release, the 20 member team comprising of 12 film crew
and eight contestants arrived in Guyana on Saturday and the production
shoot will begin next Tuesday.

The press statement explained that the contest is about survival in
the great outdoors and wilderness and contestants will undergo a
series of grueling tasks to test their survival skills and endurance.

"The contestants, both male and female will have to endure a series of
challenges from wrestling with anacondas, biting off the heads of live
piranhas to ensuring the traditional Makushi stick beating ritual,"
the release disclosed.

The series will also be filmed in Africa and Europe.

It noted: "This adventure docu-series will provide destination Guyana
with much needed positive publicity and will help to create more
awareness of and raise the profile and image of unspoilt, untouched
and undiscovered Guyana. The series will also help to promote, brand
and share with the world our indigenous Makushi culture and tradition,
our eco tourism product, community based tourism, the remote village
of Surama, our flora and fauna, wildlife, etc".

The indigenous community will benefit from the construction of three
thatched bush camps, two toilets, two dug out canoes, two aluminum
boats with engines, a generator, a laptop computer among other
equipment, the statement underlined.

In addition, it said, over 20 persons from the village will be
employed and community members will be prominently featured during the
five day shoot.

Previous big screen motion pictures that were filmed here include
White Diamond, Guiana 1838, BBC's Extreme Dream and a National
Geographic documentary on the otters, scaling Mount Roraima.

UK gives $2M for new butterfly industry

2008-04-28T11:20:00.001-07:00

UK gives $2M for new butterfly industry
Kaieteur News, 3 April 2008
http://www.kaieteurnewsgy.com/news.html

Little is known of the production of tropical butterflies for the
export market but that may soon change. The British High Commission
yesterday presented a cheque for just over $2 million to Iwokrama to
support the development of the industry at Fair View village in the
Iwokrama Forest.
The money will be used to purchase UV resistant panels for the roof of
a butterfly house that is being built for the production of
butterflies. A team of experts from the UK is in Guyana to lend
support to the project and Iwokrama has received expressions of
interest from greenhouses in the USA and the UK which are willing to
purchase the butterflies. The butterflies will be bred and exported
when they reach the pupa stage.
Butterfly production is seen as a growing business especially for
tropical countries and Guyana could likely join a list of countries,
including neighbouring Suriname, which are already benefiting from
this market. Training for the production of a butterfly guide,
identifying caterpillar diseases, butterfly identification and
taxonomy have already been carried out and there are plans to build a
packing room where the pupas will be packed for shipping and a
visitors centre. These plans will enhance Guyana's growing ecotourism
industry.
The project is part of the Darwin Initiative programme through which
the UK assists countries to reach their obligations to the
International Convention on Biological Diversity by helping them to
achieve the conservation of biological diversity; the sustainable use
of its components; and the fair and equitable sharing of benefits.
To date the programme has supported six projects in Guyana

Logger arrested, deported after traveling along Corentyne River

2008-04-28T11:19:00.000-07:00

Logger arrested, deported after traveling along Corentyne River
Kaieteur News, 10 April 2008

By Melissa Johnson
CORRIVERTON, CORENTYNE - A Guyanese logger was reportedly arrested
and deported by the Surinamese authorities for not being in possession
of a valid travel document as he traveled along the Corentyne River.
This act has sparked anger among some sections of the Corentyne.
Businessman Ganesh Singh owns two logging concessions, one at Cow
Falls some 139 miles up the Corentyne River, and the other at Wanatabo
some 200 miles further along.
On his return to Guyana, the man related that on Friday morning he
took three forestry officers up to the Wanatabo Forest Resource to
undertake verification in order to commence operation of his logging
concession.
"This concession has now been transformed into a timber sale
agreement. So the procedure is that you have to have the forestry
officer verify it before you can start working."
It was while they were returning home the following day that the
incident took place. "Me and my manager, Outram Prasad, left Wanatabo
to travel to Cow Falls. On my way I stopped to fish with my rod within
the Cow Falls concession area that is at Matawai (in the vicinity of
Wanatabo).
"While fishing, the Suriname police approached me with their boat -
about eight policemen with guns. They asked me for my passport. I said
to them I have no passport with me because I have been traveling for
the past 35 years to the same concession without having to use a
passport.
They said to me that I am on Suriname water and as such I am illegal
and they would have me arrested and taken to Suriname.
They took me to the pontoon that they were pushing. It was some
pontoon they had seized from some Surinamese."
He recalled that when he got on the vessel he saw five of his workers
on the said pontoon along with the boat they were using to travel to
another location in the vicinity of the Iguana Island area.
The businessman said that later the said Monday evening the forestry
officers were on their way back from Wanatabo and they stopped upon
seeing him.
"I had their belongings on my boat like their material and clothing.
When they stopped alongside me they were ordered to go on the pontoon
and the Suriname police asked them to produce their passports.
They told them it was their first trip up the Corentyne River and that
they were not told by their superiors that they had to have travel
documents to travel on the Corentyne River."
According to him, the officers produced their identification badges
and were allow to go free.
"That was my only way of sending a message out for my people to know
what happened to me. They kept me on board the pontoon Monday night
with the other workers.
The pontoon happened to be grounded on a rock so they couldn't go
further so they had no other alternative than to leave the pontoon
behind the next day (Tuesday).
Two Suriname police officers went with my boat and my Manager and me
to Aporea Police Station in West Suriname."
The businessman and his workers were later placed in the lock-ups at
Nickerie. "My workers complained to me that they were badly beaten.
This morning (Wednesday) about 10:00h they sent us to South Drain and
the seven of us were deported using the Canawaima to Guyana about
11:00 hours."
Back home, the immigration authorities handed them over to the
Springlands Police Station where statements were taken.
Ganesh Singh feels the matter should be looked into by those in
authority. "I would have to take this matter to the Foreign Affairs
Ministry in Guyana. What the Surinamese police are saying is that
anybody they find in the Suriname territory on the river without their
passport stamped they would hold them as illegal."
President of the Upper Corentyne Chamber of Commerce, David Subnauth,
condemned the action. "This is nonsense! Guyanese have been using the
Corentyne River from the beginning of time to do their business and to
go to their lands on the Corentyne River.
We use the river to bring down sand, logs, agricultural produce and to
go up to this resort and to Orealla, Siparuta and further up. We were
never harassed."
He said this incident with the logger is the beginning of a difficult
situation. "Unless this is immediately tackled by our Foreign Affairs
people it might escalate to a situation where we Guyanese cannot use
the river. This would pose tremendous difficulties for many of us."
For those living along the river he asked, "Do they have to get a
passport too?"
Incidentally, Wanatabo was the location where the Joint Services
destroyed an illegal airstrip and found an aircraft.

Guyanese logger held by Suriname

2008-04-28T11:18:00.000-07:00

Guyanese logger held by Suriname
Stabroek News, April 11, 2008
http://www.stabroeknews.com/?p=1116#more-1116
A Crabwood Creek logger at Ganesh Singh & Brothers Logging/Contours
has said that Suriname police seized his boat and engine after
detaining him along with his manager and five workers and then
deporting them for being "illegal in Suriname waters."
Ganesh Singh told this newspaper that he had done an inventory in an
area along the Corentyne River and on Friday three forestry officers
accompanied him and the workers to conduct a verification exercise.
He said the Suriname police were towing a pontoon that was apparently
used for dredging, back to Suriname when they made the arrest. He and
his workers were detained and later deported to Guyana via the Molsen
Creek ferry.
According to him, on Monday he sent the forestry officers to the
Wonotobo Resort while he proceeded to Cow Falls to wait on them to
travel back home the following morning.
Singh said in the meantime he stopped at Matawai to do fishing with
rods and while there the Suriname police approached him and requested
that he produce his passport.
He said his workers had already been held up along with two chainsaws,
a 75 HP Yamaha outboard engine and a quantity of grocery and they
later said that the police had beaten them badly.
The logger told Stabroek News that he found it strange that he was
asked to produce his passport since he had been travelling in the
Corentyne River for over 35 years and he was never asked to do so
before. Singh said while the forestry officers were on their way to
meet him at Cow Falls they saw his boat on the pontoon and stopped
since some of their belongings were in his boat. But the Suriname
police threatened to arrest them as well if they could not produce
their passports. It was only after Singh explained to the police that
the men were forestry officers and had never been in the Corentyne
River before that they were allowed to go. The forestry officers then
reported the plight to Singh's family.
He pointed out that on Tuesday morning the pontoon was grounded on a
rock and the police asked him to go with his boat to a police outpost
at Aporea, West Suriname. The logger said they remained there for the
day then the police later took them to Sokoe's Sawmill. He said the
police ranks removed his engine and transported it in the police van
to the police station. He could not say what they had done to his
boat.
After he arrived in Guyana yesterday he made a report to the ranks at
the Springlands Police Station. He reiterated that he and his workers
were wrongfully held as the only way to access his logging concession
was through the Corentyne River.
He plans to "take up" the matter with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs
and questioned whether the residents travelling from Orealla would
also have to produce passports.

The Freedom of Information (FOI) Bill is still languishing in the National Assembly two years after it was first tabled as a private member's bill

2008-04-28T11:17:00.000-07:00

The Freedom of Information (FOI) Bill is still languishing in the
National Assembly two years after it was first tabled as a private
member's bill by then PNCR MP Raphael Trotman.
Stabroek News, April 11, 2008
http://www.stabroeknews.com/?p=1112#more-1112

A closure plan for the Omai mines has been agreed to by the relevant
parties and the existing infrastructure is to be left at the location
rather than the site being restored to its natural state.
This disclosure yesterday, was to have been made at a press briefing
but the absence of Prime Minister Samuel Hinds forced the cancelling
of the event. However, the Guyana Information Agency (GINA) issued a
joint statement from the Government, the Guyana Geology and Mines
Commission (GGMC), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Omai
Gold Mines Limited (OGML)/IAMGOLD regarding the agreement.
The statement said that at the request of the Government, the closure
plan for the site was changed from the originally contemplated 'back
to nature' model to an 'after use' one. It explained that as a result,
infrastructure will be retained at the site including internal
roadways, landings, barge, airport/ airstrip and access road, power
plant distribution, camp site and mill site facilities including the
gyratory crusher and the aggregate plant.
It disclosed that Hinds stated that consistent with pursuing the
'after use' options for the Omai site, Guyana is inviting other mining
companies to re-evaluate the underground mining possibilities at that
location.
Production at the mine had ceased in 2005 and the parties have agreed
to the conditions of the Closure Plan conducted by OGML and which
covered site reclamation, re-vegetation and physical, biological and
chemical stability and which up to this point has been monitored by
the EPA and the GGMC. The statement said that the company reported
that it has spent some US$6M since production ceased.
According to the statement, the closure plan envisages the completion
of all environmental and other activities at the Omai Mine site by the
company by the end of September. OGML has given the required notice of
its intent to terminate the Mineral Agreement and voluntarily
relinquish its mining licence with effect from October this year; the
statement said adding that at the hand-over of the property, slated
for October 1, a full and complete certificate of compliance will be
issued.
The statement noted that the company is pursuing "one …prospect of
Eagle Mountain about 75km away and has been reviewing other prospects
in Guyana".
It added that the EPA confirms that generally OGML has complied with
the identified limits and other environmental requirements of the
Agency and the company's compliance was consistent with its ISO 14001
certification for environmental management.
Meanwhile, the GGMC acknowledged "the pioneering nature of the
operations of OGML and notes that the mining regulations and the
historic Mineral Agreement which this development engendered provided
a strong framework for the financing and operation of a world-class
large gold mining operation in conformity with prevailing
international standards".
Hinds, according to the statement, indicated that the collaboration
between the government and Cambior, the parent company of OMGL is
"evidence of the welcome and partnership which the Government and the
people of Guyana extend to Foreign Direct Investment".
The statement said that OGML has stated that its operations at Omai
were a "roller coaster ride" with highs and lows, with particular low
points being the gold price plummeting to a low of US$252 per ounce
during its operation and the rupture of its tailings dam in 1995 which
saw the declaration of the Essequibo River as a disaster area. It
noted that the company considers its greatest success as being able to
produce approximately 3.8 million ounces of gold from its surface
mining operations before the ore body was exhausted in September 2005.
The site had been explored by Golden Star Resources Limited led by
David Fennell and culminated with Cambior Inc establishing OGML in
1991. The mine was opened on March 11, 1993 by the late President, Dr
Cheddi Jagan.

Not all the people in the hinterland are Amerindians

2008-04-28T11:16:00.001-07:00

Not all the people in the hinterland are Amerindians
Stabroek News, April 11, 2008
http://www.stabroeknews.com/?cat=5&paged=2
Dear Editor,
Whenever there is some new development in the hinterland the headline
reads Amerindians now have access to whatever, whether it be water or
electricity.
The point I am trying to make is that if you look at the ethnic make
up of these regions you would see that the people are not 100%
Amerindians.
Whenever there is report on Buxton, for example, the headline never
reads "African Guyanese now have greater access to new development"
and in a report on Lusignan the headline never reads "East Indians
now have greater access to a health facility."
Yours faithfully,
S Khan

WWF Guianas embarking on major public awareness drive in Guyana

2008-04-28T11:13:00.000-07:00

WWF Guianas embarking on major public awareness drive in Guyana
Guyana Chronicle, 13 April 2008
http://www.guyanachronicle.com/topstory.html#Anchor-Presiden-49177

Gold mining pollution abatement officer (standing) during an awareness
exercise with miners
The World Wildlife Fund (WWF) Guianas, a global Non-Governmental
Organisation (N GO) working in Guyana for almost 10 years, has planned
a major public awareness drive in Guyana to sensitise the masses of
the Guyanese people to its existence here, and its ongoing and
intensified collaboration with the government and people of Guyana.

The local office, previously located in Bel Air Park, is now housed at
285 Irving Street, Queenstown, and is one of three located in the
Region. The other two are in French Guiana and Suriname. The regional
WWF Guianas office is based in Suriname.

WWF Guianas was established here in 1999 after the Guianian Moist
Forests region covering the three Guianas was identified as one of 238
eco-regions with the highest priority areas for conservation world
wide.

Cognizant that many Guyanese are yet unaware of WWF and its mission
and many if they hear of the name would think of a certain wrestling
federation, WWF Guianas affirms that it is important to note that the
only official 'WWF' in Guyana is World Wildlife Fund!

WWF Freshwater officer (far left) with local fishermen taking part in
the Arapaima survey
Until recently, the task force in Guyana was very small, but has now
expanded to include a Forestry Officer, a Freshwater Officer, a Gold
Mining Pollution Abatement Officer and an Education and Communications
Officer.

Some recent highlights include:
* working with various forestry companies to achieve Forest
Stewardship Council (FSC) status;
* establishing wildlife clubs nationwide,

* robust establishment of working relationship with miners to reduce pollution;

* the carrying out an Arapaima survey in the Rupununi;

* working closely with other organisations in setting up the Kaieteur
National Park;

* as well as planning for the Kanuku Mountains protected area.

In addition, the Forestry Officer is working closely with various
communities to assist them in community forestry techniques so that
they can use their forests in a successful and a sustainable way.

WWF Forestry officer (right) working to assist a local forestry
company in implementing eco friendly logging practices
The WWF Office has also given grants to various educational
establishments to assist them in their environmental awareness
initiatives. The office hosted a panel discussion for World Water Day
on March 20th, and is currently in the process of working with the
National Library, promoting awareness and education.

Working in over 100 countries worldwide, WWF has more than 2000
conservation projects underway at any one time. The WWF Guianas
Programme is a WWF conservation initiative launched in 1998, covering
the three Guianas and targeting the Guianian Eco-region complex

The mission of WWF in brief is: ȁTo conserve habitats and protect
flora and fauna in order to ensure a healthy and working ecosystem
that also serves to support human populations."

Currently, WWF Guianas is working under the Guianas Sustainable
Natural Resources Management Project under which there are 6 main
programme areas: Sustainable Forest Management, the Gold Mining
Pollution Abatement, Protected Areas Establishment and Management,
Freshwater Conservation and Management, Species Conservation and
Management, and Environmental Education and Communication.

British High Commission supports Guyana's Birding Tourism

2008-04-28T11:12:00.002-07:00

British High Commission supports Guyana's Birding Tourism
Guyana Chronicle, 13 April 2008.

THE Iwokrama International Centre for Rainforest Conservation and
Development has received a US$8,000 boost from the British High
Commission and two 'Guides to Birds of Northern South America' books.

The Commission is assisting in sponsoring a training programme for
birding guides in recognition of the need and potential of Guyana's
tourism industry.

The programme will facilitate the training of 16 guides who will
undergo two weeks of intermediate level training at the Bina Hill
Institute, Surama Village, Region Nine, and at the Iwokrama Field
Station in Region Eight. In addition, three or five persons will be
trained as trainers, a British High Commission release stated.

The training programme is scheduled to start mid-May, and will be
conducted by two trainers from the United Kingdom and Peru.

Recently, the British High Commission launched a 'Best practices in
ecotourism' workshop to train and prepare tour operators and birding
guides, among others, in the tourism industry, to improve the
management of Guyana's tourism resources.

The workshop started on April 7-8 at the British High Commissioner's
Residence and continued at the Bina Hill Institute in Annai on April
9-10. The last workshop is planned for June 3-4 at Lethem.

The workshop is being sponsored by the Commission at a cost of 20,000
pounds sterling.

The Iwokrama centre manages one million acres of forest in central
Guyana. The centre's main objective is to show how tropical forests
can be conserved while being used to provide ecological, social and
economic benefits to local and international communities.

Features of Iwokrama include the only state-of-the-art canopy walkway
in the Guianas, bird-watching with over 500 species of birds, jungle
trekking through one of the nine designated trails, guided nature
walks, nocturnal wildlife spotting by vehicle, foot and boat, and the
Indian Island sunrise boat ride.

Another feature to come on stream soon will be a butterfly farm where
visitors can enjoy a guided tour, viewing at least 10 different
species. Visitors will also be able to learn the Amerindian technique
of using a bow and arrow. (GINA)

Earth Day symposium focuses on energy conservation

2008-04-28T11:12:00.001-07:00

Earth Day symposium focuses on energy conservation
Stabroek News, April 23, 2008
http://www.stabroeknews.com/?p=2102#more-2102

The importance of energy conservation in the light of high oil prices
and an increased awareness of the realities of climate change were the
focus of a symposium organised by the University of Guyana (UG) on the
occasion of Earth Day, yesterday.
Science Advisor to the Caribbean Community Climate Change Centre Dr
Ulric Trotz told the audience that several technical issues still need
to be worked out to successfully address the quantification of carbon
discharged from the atmosphere through forests like Guyana's. He said
that this was important since carbon sequestration could be a means
for countries like Guyana to benefit economically. He said such
countries have to rally for local action and these efforts have to be
more than just foreign companies buying themselves clean through cheap
credits.
Trotz said that people may be able to change their farming systems to
make them friendlier to the environment. He also pointed out that
non-till methods, crop rotation and mulching could all help in
sequestering carbon. "Building in timber is another way in
sequestering carbon," he said. He explained too that prudent forest
management is a way of coping with climate change. Trotz said that
this puts Guyana's standing forests as a tremendous resource, which
can bring money into the country. He noted that the commoditisation of
carbon has provided a commercial impetus for people to start storing
carbon.
In her presentation, Dr Raquel Thomas, Director of Resource Management
at the Iwokrama International Centre, said standing forests must be
valued. She said forests cover 30 per cent of the earth's land surface
and that only five per cent of the world's tropical forests remain and
those house almost 50 per cent of the world's biodiversity. She noted
that Guyana's emissions are among the lowest in the world.
Thomas slammed the Clean Development Mechanism of the Kyoto Protocol
which gives countries incentives to replant after they would have
destroyed their forests. "The CDM does not benefit countries like
Guyana… we do hope that within a year or 18 months, changes to the
Kyoto Protocol would lead to something that could benefit Guyana," she
said. Thomas also said "We cannot avoid looking at the links to
poverty alleviation… we have to focus on the economics. We are talking
about livelihoods," adding that standing forests are not treated with
sufficient urgency.
"The issue of standing forests is treated like a poor cousin in global
political and public debates on climate change," she said. "Standing
forests must be valued," Thomas said, adding that it must be more than
just a conservation value. "Eco-system services must become
commercially saleable."
Thomas said business and livelihood drive deforestation and so
relevant and real opportunities have to be found to alleviate poverty.
The director said too that there is a lack of sufficient information
for trading in relation to valuing eco-system services and sustainable
forest management.
Meanwhile, Professor Suresh Narine, Head of the Institute for Applied
Science and Technology, noted that although biofuel might be a
solution for the energy woes of Guyana, it might not work on a world
scale. He said that even if all the available lands were cultivated
for biofuel production, this might not be sufficient for all of the
world's energy demands. Narine said in Guyana agricultural land did
not have to be displaced for ethanol production since there was land
aplenty.
Others who made presentations at the symposium were acting CEO of the
Guyana Energy Agency Mahender Sharma, Senior Lecturer, SEES Dr Patrick
Williams, Commissioner, Guyana Lands and Surveys Commission Andrew
Bishop and Manager Guyana Shield Eco-Region Project, United Nations
Development Programme Dr Patrick Chesney.
The seminar was hosted by UG's School of Earth and Environmental
Sciences and held at Hotel Tower.

Corruption at Customs is nothing new, it never seems to change

2008-04-28T11:08:00.002-07:00

Corruption at Customs is nothing new, it never seems to change
Stabroek News, letters. April 18, 2008
http://www.stabroeknews.com/?p=1617#more-1617

Dear Editor,
I have noted the recent corruption probe at Customs House, and I am
quite surprised at the news it is generating. Everyone in Guyana is
aware that there is corruption at the GRA. This is no surprise or
ground shattering revelation, in fact I am quite surprised that the
media is actually bothering to report on it.
A cursory glance at the assets acquired by these public servants, the
vehicles they drive, their lifestyles would have told any idiot with
an IQ of -2.6, that exact tale. But the Management, which should bear
full responsibility, time and time again, choose always to ignore. The
usual mantra taken out of the President's Hand Book? 'Show us the
evidence!' said in unison. Evidence which even the blind can see.
What is quite surprising is that it is the President, no less, who has
to initiate the probe. This is a serious indictment on the people who
run the GRA. But then again, hardly surprising, when not so recently
the GPOC attempted to place cameras in the Customs designated area of
the GPOC, designed to root out the established drug network, they met
with the full resistance of the GRA.
So I guess the President will once again supposed-ly have to
personally run down the culprits at the GRA, that all and sundry are
fully aware of. But like the duty free, dolphin and milk scam issues,
when anointed people are involved, events will be caught up in the
myriad of court issues, poor inexperienced prosecutions, union issues,
eventual governmental complacency, supervening events ie Carifesta
(where we will celebrate our glorious mediocrity), dogs biting people,
Ignition Concert, local cricket at the Bourda sward, and inevitably
will die its predictable wasted and natural death. A few people will
be dispatched via their luxury rides to their luxury homes, to live in
peace and harmony with their corrupt nouveau riche neighbours, go to
church on Sundays and prepare for the hereafter, and the big ones will
continue to nest at Customs House, at the usual expense of the
Guyanese overburdened tax payers.
The end result? Millions of hard earned taxpayers monies will be
churned into investigations, meetings, superficial re-workings of the
existing system and high paid consultants who will repeat what has
been said over and over before. The real end result? - Brisk business
as usual at Customs House.
No wonder Naipaul is so caustic on us in the Caribbean.
Yours faithfully,
I Persaud

The Customs racket: No one is protected!

2008-04-28T11:08:00.001-07:00

The Customs racket: No one is protected!
Stabroek News, April 18, 2008
http://www.stabroeknews.com/?p=1635#more-1635

Last Tuesday President Bharrat Jagdeo made a clinical pronouncement on
graft and corruption. In response to a question raised at his press
conference about the recent Customs/Fidelity alleged fraud he read
what appeared to be nothing short of a 'riot act' that is designed,
it appears, to remove what is widely believed to be one of the oldest
- and, for the businessmen and Customs officials who have benefited
from the practice - most lucrative forms of corruption in Guyana.
And if the President is to be taken at his word the reported
"shakedown" involving Fidelity, a local distribution company and
Customs officials, could trigger a far wider investigation into what,
by the President's own admission, has been a sustained plundering of
the public treasury arising out of collusion between customs
functionaries and importers.

What exactly did the President say? He said, among other things, that
he had learnt during a meeting with the Commissioner General of the
Guyana Revenue Authority of "what seems to be a major ring operating
in the Customs area;" that the ring extends "beyond the Fidelity
issue;" and that " some of the people who have been working in civil
service jobs… have assets that are a hundred times, five hundred times
their accumulated income."
Intriguingly, President Jagdeo alluded to the "far reach" of some of
the people who may be implicated in the Fidelity scam and anticipated
that those people may well engage in "quite a lot of lobbying,"
presumably to have themselves exonerated and perhaps even to seek to
implicate others. "If anyone had any intention of coming to see me or
lobby me," the President declared, "tell them not to. I don't want to
hear any calls about who is innocent and who is guilty;"
And then the President said that he had heard that others, "including
government officials" had been approached. The names of those
officials, the President said, should be given to the investigating
team. And to cap what is potentially a far-reaching pronouncement the
President gave notice that "there is no one who is protected."
There is a profound and multi-faceted significance to the President's
pronouncement. First, it amounts to an open admission of an extensive
and highly organized racket underpinned by dimensions of graft and
"shakedown" involving Customs officials and some businessmen. The
Fidelity scam, the President said, "is not just one matter." In his
words "it's a system" through which "large sums, rather than being
paid into the Treasury, are diverted to a large number of people in
exchange for free passage."
The second significant thing about the President's statement is that
it warns off those who may have been implicated in the scam and who
may seek to use their "far reach" to lobby him – and presumably any
other government or party official who may have the clout to influence
the process; and that, the President said, applies equally to
"government officials" who may be fingered in the scam.
Thirdly, the President said, precisely because of "the far reach of
some of the people" the Fidelity matter and others will not be
subjected to an internal investigation, but rather, is being
investigated by a Task Force involving the Ministry of Finance, the
Auditor General's Office and the Police. In this regard the President
appears to be seeking to circumvent the eventuality of those with "far
reach" attempting to influence - or perhaps go over the head of - an
internal GRA investigation.
What the President's statement has also done is to place a huge
responsibility on the shoulders of the "investigating team." In
declaring that "we will dig deep" he appears to be anticipating
outcomes to the investigation that go beyond the Fidelity matter. One
is hard-pressed to recall any investigating team in a matter involving
corruption ever before having been given such a public carte blanche
by the President.
If the letter and what appears to be the spirit of the President's
pronouncement on the Fidelity matter is enforced by the investigating
team we can anticipate – again according to the President – a careful
examination of "assets", among other things – a pronouncement that
implies that those who have benefited 'big time' from the Fidelity
scam and other scams will be targeted.
The hundred million dollar question, of course, is whether the
investigation will take the course outlined in the sentiments
expressed by the President or whether it will simply evaporate in a
mist of tokenistic disciplinary measures and yet another "shakeup" in
Customs administration that leaves the system open to still more scams
and rackets. The President's statement at last Tuesday's press
conference is, in a very real sense, a challenge to his own
determination – and the determination of the institutions and
individuals charged with investigating the Fidelity scam – to help rid
his administration of the cloud of corruption that hovers over it.

Gov't taking back unused savannah lands

2008-04-28T11:07:00.003-07:00

Gov't taking back unused savannah lands
Stabroek News, April 17, 2008
http://www.stabroeknews.com/?p=1595

Government is in the process of repossessing unutilized lands in the
intermediate savannahs that were given out to holdings for plantation
type agriculture to make them available to others.
Meanwhile, President Bharrat Jagdeo has said that Trinidad and Tobago
(T&T) had expressed an interest in agricultural pursuits in Guyana
"but unfortunately we have been unable to move beyond expressions of
interests."
At a press conference he held at the Office of the President on
Tuesday, the President said with regard to T&T's interest, "When we
tried to pin down specific projects we have not had much success."
Trinidad has since announced it is setting up its own mega farms on
the twin-island
While speaking about the rising cost of living and ensuring food
security and how this could be dealt with, Jagdeo said that
plantation-type agriculture was important for Guyana.
At present, he said, there are a few proposals which are being
examined. He said that lands given out to large-scale holdings but not
utilized are being recovered to make them available to others with
plans to develop them.
He noted that in June Guyana would be hosting a conference under the
aegis of Caricom to bring regional government officials and investors
in agriculture along with their bankers to see how much business could
be done.
Noting that the government was ensuring that adequate supplies of rice
are available in Guyana, Jagdeo said that the price of rice could not
be kept low when the current rate on the world market is now US$700
per tonne and farmers would want to benefit from the world price.
Basmati rice is also now selling at US$1,200 per tonne on the world
market.
He said that the increase in price was due mainly to drought which is
affecting some countries, increased demand for food in emerging
economies like China and India, the movement away from production of
grains for food to production for ethanol, and the rising cost of oil.

Foreign direct investment and growth

2008-04-28T11:07:00.001-07:00

Foreign direct investment and growth
Kaieteur News, Editorial. 16 April 2008.
http://www.kaieteurnewsgy.com/editorial.html

For two decades now we have been following the triple commandments of
the 'Washington Consensus -- stabilize, liberalize, and privatise – in
order to attract foreign direct investments (FDI). The results have
not been exactly stellar.
From our perspective as a developing country, FDI is of significance
only if it creates employment as well as provides capital for
development. However, since transnational corporations prefer to
invest in the modern sectors of the economy, which demand relatively
more skilled personnel than we have at present, our employment needs
go unfulfilled.
As regards capital, FDI makes only marginal contributions in capital
formation. Actually, in the equation of growth and investment, growth
is a crucial determinant of FDI itself; therefore, the question is
whether developing countries commercially grew as a result of the
contribution of FDI, or they grow first in order to attract FDI?
The evidence of FDI, so far attracted by developing countries, shows
that FDI tends to gravitate towards countries that are stable and have
efficient infrastructure – neither of which we are blessed with.
Economic growth, on the other hand, seems to increase with greater
trade openness, instead of foreign direct investment inflows. The
mission lies ahead in making use of investment for our development
needs. So far, the evidence indicates that there are difficulties in
deriving macro-economic benefits from most FDI, as well as to get them
into our area of comparative advantage — agriculture.
Our FDI is highly concentrated in three sectors: telecommunications,
financial services and mining. Our land, labour and capital are not
fully developed for the advanced sector investment. Therefore,
technology transfer as well as employment generation have proven to be
a myth.
In addition, these companies charge high management and services costs
in the name of technological transfer, but actually they use it to
lower their taxes and enhance their profits. In fact, these FDI's have
no commitment for technology transfer to the host country.
The ultimate goal of domestic growth will be achieved only if the
investment is not volatile. The investment in infrastructure,
agriculture and manufacturing sectors will support export-led growth.
That is the reason why neither the countries which developed in the
19th century, like Germany, US or Japan, nor the countries which
developed in the 19th and 20th centuries, like Russia, China and
Korea, placed FDI investment as central to their development strategy,
because benefits and costs are unevenly distributed between the sender
and receiver of these investments.
Though one can point to the success of the East Asian "tigers" as due
to the attraction of foreign investment, what must be appreciated is
that Malaysia, South Korea, China and Japan have made technology
transfer as a performance requirement, along with strong regulations
of the markets.
In addition to maintaining macro-economic stability, all high growth
countries capitalised the foreign investment benefit by having
protectionist measures to attract foreign investment and to spur
export-oriented growth at the same time.
Nevertheless, this does not suggest that we take a regressive trade
policy, but that we should take advantage of the opportunity of
economic globalization. There is also no doubt that economic
globalization is more advantageous for developed countries but, still,
we need to capitalize the opportunities whatever offered to us through
foreign investment by diverting it to the right sectors.
Our Government has rightfully identified our agriculture sector as the
fulcrum of growth in the near term, and has embarked on an ambitious
diversification programme in this area – especially into
non-traditional crops. As we pointed out before, we cannot lose in
this area and we cannot wait on FDI.
We predict, in line with our observation above, that when growth is
demonstrated here, the FDI will arrive. But we will have to ensure
that they follow our development strategy.
In conclusion, it is suggested that, for us in the long run, foreign
capital is no panacea for sustainable development and growth, given
our industrial, institutional and human resource constraints, and will
have no ultimate correlation with economic growth, unless we are able
to capitalize the FDI for competitive advantages and export-led
growth. To believe otherwise will only ensure that we end up simply as
a facilitator for other players.

Forestry commission warns of continuing breaches

2008-04-28T11:06:00.001-07:00

Forestry commission warns of continuing breaches
Stabroek News, April 16, 2008
http://www.stabroeknews.com/?p=1371#more-1371

The Guyana Forestry Commission (GFC) is concerned that a few forestry
companies continue to be in breach of the GFC guidelines, especially
in relation to widely publicised procedures for harvesting and
extracting forest produce and one such company will be dealt with.
In a release yesterday, Commissioner of Forests James Singh said that
in April 2008, on the basis of GFC monitoring activities, it was
determined that one company has harvested logs from blocks that were
not approved for harvesting by the GFC for the year 2008. "The gravity
of this offence is compounded by the fact that this is a repeat of
breaches committed by the same company in 2007. The GFC will not
tolerate this blatant disregard re compliance with guidelines and
appropriate action will be taken against the company," Singh said.
The GFC also advised that several forestry companies had committed
breaches of procedure in 2007, and after lengthy discussions with the
GFC and the Minister of Agriculture, these companies had agreed in
principle to pay calculated compensations to the GFC. "However on
April 4, 2008, GFC received a lawyer's letter outlining one company's
claims that it was not in breach of GFC procedures. The GFC will take
appropriate actions against this company," Singh said.
He reminded holders of Timber Sales Agreements (TSAs) and Wood Cutting
Leases (WCL) that the final date for submission of 100 per cent
inventory information, regarding 100 hectare blocks to be harvested in
2008 is May 30, 2008.
"Concessionaires are further advised to ensure that their Annual
Operational Plan (AOP) for 2009 is submitted on or before November 30,
2008 with the accompanying 100 per cent inventory information on the
blocks proposed for harvesting in 2009," Singh said.

Dr Misir writes more like a political commentator than an academic

2008-04-28T11:04:00.002-07:00

Dr Misir writes more like a political commentator than an academic
Stabroek News, April 16, 2008
http://www.stabroeknews.com/?p=1387#more-1387

Dear Editor,
Poor Prem Misir. The timing is not very good just now. If he knows
anything about cricket he is bound to realise that he is playing off
the back foot.
One always assumed that an academic like Dr Misir would be predisposed
to the objectivity for which his scholarship should have been
characteristic. Instead he prefers to be regarded as another political
commentator. In our besieged environment the implication of bias is
automatic.
Contrary to his uninformed view 'micro-management' is identified as a
counter-productive management style which is condemned internationally
in every respected management publication, for the obvious reason that
it undermines the authority that should complement responsibility,
pollutes and dilutes the decision-making process, and diminishes the
self-confidence of the players involved.
The letter captioned "Dr Misir's submission on marginalization was
simplistic and not impressive" (08.04.09) to which Misir has responded
in Kaieteur News April 11, and the Guyana Chronicle of April 10, would
not have been allowed, at least in the latter newspaper, exactly as a
result of the specific policy instructed by the Administration to the
Chronicle's Board.
This 'exclusion' is certainly synonymous with 'marginalisation' , and
is reflective of the style of micro-management which permeates every
public sector organisation in this country, without exception.
It is truly regrettable that this scholar suffers from the myopia that
afflicts his colleagues and masters. So that rather than deafening
himself to the assertions of 'marginalisation' in our environment, he
should be persuaded to investigate the validity of the range of
situations identified. He could still do a substantive service to the
Administration, if he were to take such an initiative.
Part II therefore of Misir's Perspective on 'marginalisation'
published in the Sunday Chronicle of April 6, 2008, is another useless
exercise in obfuscatory statistics. The ethnic distribution continues
to be meaningless. This is compounded by the author's refusal to
recognise the 'marginalisation' of institutions, regardless of ethnic
distribution. Once again the allegation on Channel 6's (last)
programme on Friday night, April 11, that the Speaker of the National
Assembly was being disciplined is a worrying reference to the
marginalisation process.
Misir would certainly be familiar with the well publicised
micro-management of the UG Council, for example; and the embarrassing
'miniaturisation' (if he insists) of the Vice- Chancellor, amongst
others.
Again Misir should be invited to re-read (he couldn't possibly have
missed it!) S.N's editorial of April 11, 2008, and its explicit
reference to the 'marginalisation' of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs
from which a perceptibly 'micro-managed' Foreign Minister has recently
demitted his stressed-out office.
Embarrassingly his successor, less than a week in office, has had her
views publicly challenged by the Head of the Presidential Secretariat
over the matter of Venezuela's aid to Buxton. This obvious confusion
of signals surrounding reporting relationships and accountability may
appear to have just emerged, but as a stressor, it is really
reflective of the continuum of micro-management from 'across the
road'.
Experiences of the Guyana Water Inc. (listed in Misir's table as
Guyana Water Authority), the Forestry Commission, Guyana Gold Board,
Go Invest and the NIS for example, are not necessarily dissimilar.
In one instance an official of a PPP Trade union is the non-executive
Director of a Board, with unchallenged responsibility and authority
for all appointments. Which brings us to this depressing fact: the
'Africans' condescendingly appointed to Public Boards are usually
expected to be 'politically correct'. They are not expected to flex
their intellectual muscle. Even 'politically incorrect' Indians,
however relevantly qualified, are not deemed acceptable. So much for
'ethnic' distribution.
But I began by saying that this was not an auspicious time for the
Misirs of this world. The recent dictat that has resulted in the
closure of Channel 6 for four months must surely be cause for their
blushes; and pause for their reflection on the insidious forms of
'marginalisation'.
Members of the ACB must feel at least discomfited.
Incidentally, this topic was discussed in the press as far back as
2005, when a certain Minister took the same myopic stance as currently
espoused. One Joelle Joaquin writing to SN at the time, had this to
say: "Marginalisation" is about: the demoralization of the spirit; the
consequential diminution of energy and motivation to produce; the loss
of hope – which descends into desperation to quit and migrate – all to
the detriment of self, family and the community as a whole.
Fundamentally it is the loss of self-respect which unhappily informs
the loss of respect for those who caused the condition.
Marginalisation is in fact so endemic a condition in the society that
it is accepted as a natural phenomenon, and hardly perceived as an
aberration."
Yours faithfully,
Carl Abrahams

Omai mining site closure agreement inked -overseas based Guyanese signals interest in location

2008-04-28T11:04:00.001-07:00

Omai mining site closure agreement inked -overseas based Guyanese
signals interest in location
By Wendella Davidson
http://www.guyanachronicle.com/topstory.html#Anchor-?xth-44108

Prime Minister Sam Hinds with overall responsibility for the mining
sector and Mr. Ronald Webster, Chairman of the Guyana Geology and
Mines Commission (GGMC), affix their respective signatures to copies
of the joint press release on the 'Closure Plan' for the Omai mines
site, yesterday. Partly hidden is Commissioner, GGMC, Mr. William
Woolford. (Photo by Carl Croker)
A DECLINE in the price of gold on the global market prompted Omai Gold
Mines Limited to close its operations, a top official of the company
said yesterday.
According to Human Resources Manager of the company, Norman Mc Lean of
the 3.8 million ounces of gold which Omai produced, two million
ounces, representing more than half of the amount, was sold at a price
ranging between US$250 and US$300 per ounce.

He said that scenario where the drop in gold prices on the world
market resulted in the company finding it uneconomical to continue,
was the most significant factor which affected OGML which throughout
its operation had as its thrust "mining with the environment in mind."

The closure plan, as agreed to by the relevant parties, includes that
the site will not be restored to its natural state but left as "after
use" meaning infrastructure such as internal roadways, landings,
barge, airport, airstrip and access road, power plant distribution and
mines site facilities, along with the gyratory crusher and the
aggregate plant, will be retained at the location.

Prime Minister Samuel Hinds, who has responsibility for the mining
sector, said the government will shortly be inviting companies and or
groups in the business of mining to re-evaluate and submit proposals
on the underground mining possibilities at the Omai site.

Hinds made this disclosure yesterday, at a news conference hosted at
the Guyana Geology and Mines Commission (GGMC) office to formally sign
a joint document and announce the closure plan of the mines site.

It is anticipated that the proposals would be submitted by mid-August,
with a further six weeks for the government and the Geology and Mines
Commission to review the decision made on the way forward.

According to the Prime Minister, already an overseas-based Guyanese
has signalled an interest in the location.

He noted too, that during one of those low periods, the company had
even considered placing the operations under "care and maintenance",
which meant "mothballing and kept it going" in the hope of starting
when the price increases.

Under the termination of the Mineral Agreement and relinquishing of
the Mining Licence agreement, OGML which over the 14 years of
existence invested capital US$253M in the project and produced
approximately 3.8 million ounces of gold from its surface At that time
it is expected that a full and complete Certificate of Compliance will
be issued.

The Omai site was likened by the Prime Minister as a significant event
from which many lessons could be adapted with a view to improving
knowledge in mining, adding that the operations also offered the
opportunity for Guyanese labour to be utilised.

Chairman of GGMC, Mr. Ronald Webster in noting that mining requires a
huge financial investment, thanked OGML, for maintaining access which
was critical to the area, adding too, that the company's presence also
aided the quality of life in the area.

Remarking on the enormous potential for mining in Guyana, the GGMC
Chairman said the importance is not that the Closure Plan no longer
includes a "return to nature", which would have meant that the roads,
the airstrip and other things would have been no longer available, but
that it leaves behind an infrastructure for future development.

On this note Mr. Webster warned that GGMC will take very serious steps
against persons who have been entering the property illegally and
cause damage which can affect the reclamation process.

Commissioner of GGMC, Mr. William Woolford, who in association with
OGML began from the negotiation stage described the experience as a
"quite a unique", "fantastic" and "unforgettable" one, as he has seen
OMGL demonstrate that a mine of that magnitude could be built in a
year and a half with proper organisation.

The site had been explored by Golden Star Resources Limited led by
David Fennell and culminated with Cambior Inc establishing OGML in
1991. The mine, the first large-scale cyanide operation in Guyana was
opened on March 11, 1993 by the late President, Dr Cheddi Jagan.

Guyanese Professor David Dabydeen and Annette Arjune win Sabga awards

2008-04-28T11:03:00.001-07:00

Guyanese Professor David Dabydeen and Annette Arjune win Sabga awards
. . . Keep good company for success - Ansa Mc Al Foundation Chairman
Guyana Chronicle, 15 April 2008.
http://www.guyanachronicle.com/topstory.html#Anchor-?xth-44108

Guyanese Annette Arjoon, joint winner of the award for Excellence in
Public and Civic Contributions, accepts her award from Chairman of the
awards Regional Eminent Persons Selection Panel, Sir Ellis Clarke on
Saturday night at the Trinidad Hilton, Port-of-Spain.
NEWSDAY (Trinidad) - Ansa Mc Al Foundation Chairman Dr Anthony Sabga
told recipients of the 2008 Anthony N Sabga Caribbean Awards for
Excellence that the secret to success is to first believe in oneself
and "then act with determination, perseverance and integrity" to
achieve one's goals.
He said this was an attitude he adopted while observing his father in action.

The gala award ceremony was held on Saturday night at the Trinidad
Hilton, Port-of-Spain.

Sabga advised the laureates and those who seek success to keep good
company. "The quality of people with which you associate, mirrors your
own quality," he said, adding, "aside from that, the knowledge and the
inspiration you absorb from your friends and colleagues help to mold
your future."

He explained that his 70 years in business has been rewarding due to
the people he associated with. "I have found pleasure and success with
everything I have done," he said, as he welcomed the laureates into
the ANSA McAL foundation family.

Guyanese Professor David Dabydeen received the Award for Excellence in
Arts and Letters; Barbadian businessman, James Husbands won the Award
for Excellence in Science and Technology and Guyanese Annette Arjoon
and Claudette Richardson-Pious were joint-winners of the Award for
Excellence in Public and Civic Contributions.

The laureates received a gold medal, a citation and TT$500,000.

Chairman of the ANSA McAL Foundation, Dr Anthony Sabga, right,
presents 2008 laureate, David Dabydeen with his Gold Medal for
Excellence in Arts and Letters, as Chairman of the awards Regional
Eminent Persons Selection Panel, Sir Ellis Clarke looks on at the 2008
Anthony N Sabga Caribbean Awards for Excellence held Saturday night at
the Trinidad Hilton, Port-of-Spain. (Newsday photos)
Arjoon and Richardson-Pious gave back to Sabga in a show of
appreciation for their awards.
Arjoon's work as founding Secretary of the Guyana Marine Turtle
Conservation Society (GMTCS) led to the establishment of the
Amerindian operated North West Organics, a company which provides the
natives with a means of income to afford food other than hunting
turtles for their meat and eggs. She has also lobbied Guyana's
government to impose a partial ban on trawler fishing in the areas
around nesting beaches during the nesting season.

GMTCS, has also been instrumental in the Guyanese government decision
to identify Shell Beach, the main Guyanese turtle nesting area, as a
protected area. Addressing Sabga's failed desire to turn Pigeon Point
Beach Resort into a National Park, Arjoon after receiving her award,
dedicated the conservation of Shell Beach to Sabga.

She invited him to come to Guyana to assist in the development of the
beach into a National Park.

Sabga, in an interview with Newsday on Sunday, expressed his delight
at the invitation. "It is not a remote possibility," he said,
"anything to upgrade the concept of one Caribbean identity is foremost
in my mind. What is in Pigeon Point may not be in Guyana but Guyana
has its own unique features."

Sabga went further to hint that the next Caribbean Awards may be held
in another island. "We have to do what we can to keep the Caribbean
united," he said. When accepting her award, Richardson-Pious presented
Sabga with a scaled replica of the award winning "Bashy Bus",
developed by Richardson-Pious through her NGO, Children First.

The bus is a mobile HIV testing and counselling clinic staffed by
youth which goes to inner city and rural locations in Jamaica. Her
organisation assists children who struggle with poverty, abuse,
abandonment, exploitation and malnourishment and extends its services
to their families.

Coordinator of the awards' Regional Eminent Persons Selection Panel,
Michael Mansoor stated that the award is not an "end of life" offering
dedicated to what the individual accomplished.

However, he said it provides an opportunity to encourage the laureates
to foster and nurture their life's work and passion.

Iwokrama operations get FSC stamp of approval

2008-04-28T11:02:00.001-07:00

Iwokrama operations get FSC stamp of approval
Kaieteur News, 25 April 2008

The Iwokrama International Centre and its joint venture partner
Tigerwood Guyana Inc (TGI) have achieved Forestry Stewardship Council
(FSC) certification for the Iwokrama rain forest.
The Chief Executive Officers of the two companies, Mr Dane Gobin and
Sir Ronald Sanders respectively, made the announcement yesterday.
They revealed that the FSC certificate has been issued after the
forest management and sustainable harvesting operations in Iwokrama
were closely examined by FSC appointed auditors, Woodmark, of the UK
last year.
FSC's model of certification allows products that flow from certified
forests to enter the global marketplace with a credential that is
unique. Any FSC labelled product can be traced back to a certified
source, and confirms that forestry operations are conducted in
accordance with international social, environmental and economic best
practices. It also confirms that local communities are fully
integrated into the business both at the strategic and operational
levels and are involved in the decision making process.
Mr Gobin said: "This is a proud moment for Iwokrama and its joint
venture partner TGI. In securing the certificate for the Iwokrama
forest and its operations, Guyana has been placed firmly on the map of
responsible forestry management. We are the only venture in the area
of the Guiana Shield to now enjoy FSC accreditation".
He explained that the Guiana Shield underlies Guyana, Suriname, French
Guiana, as well as parts of Colombia, Venezuela and Brazil.
Speaking for TGI, Sir Ronald declared: "FSC certification was
difficult to accomplish. It called for a commitment to sustainable
harvesting that had to be backed with greater resources than a normal
harvesting operation in order to achieve higher standards".
Sanders pointed out that "the sustainable harvesting operation is also
contributing to the maintenance of the valuable ecosystem-services of
the forest which benefits all mankind".
The representatives of the two companies stated that harvesting is
being conducted in strict accordance with principles of Reduced Impact
Logging (RIL). The objective is to minimize damage and maintain the
forest in an intact condition. Felling blocks will be closed to allow
for natural regeneration of plant species according to a 60-year cycle
as soon as selective harvesting is completed.
They also drew attention to the fact that a significant number of
members of the surrounding Amerindian communities have been gainfully
employed in the forest operations and, as these expand adding
value-added activities, even more of the community members will find
jobs within the forest, thus helping to alleviate poverty and
contributing to community cohesiveness.
Mr. Gobin expressed thanks to the WWF Guianas programme and to the
Commonwealth for providing resources to the Iwokrama Centre for the
certification exercise.
The Iwokrama International Centre (IIC) manages the forest under a
mandate from the Government of Guyana and the Commonwealth
Secretariat.
In 1995, the Guyana government formally made a gift of the Iwokrama
forest to the Commonwealth (a group of 53 nations consisting of
Britain and many of its former colonies) with the objective of
demonstrating how tropical forests can be conserved and sustainably
used to provide ecological, social and economic benefits to local,
national and international communities.
Ten years later, the Board of Trustees of IIC decided to pursue a
limited harvesting operation through a business partnership involving
local communities and the private sector. A joint venture company was
formed with TGI investing the risk capital and providing the
management and marketing expertise.
The Iwokrama Centre had been working on forest certification since
2005 when a pre-assessment exercise was conducted to determine
compliance with FSC certification guidelines.
IIC and TGI decided from the outset that they wanted to pursue
international best practice in the sustainable harvesting of timber so
immediately on the formation of the joint venture company a year ago,
both ITI and TGI continued to pursue certification accreditation and
subjected themselves to close scrutiny and rigorous tests from
auditors appointed by FSC.

Trust Fund for Protected Areas System in Guyana to be established - -HPS

2008-04-28T11:00:00.000-07:00

Guyana Chronicle news item, Friday 25 April 2008

http://www.guyanachronicle.com/news.html

Trust Fund for Protected Areas System in Guyana to be established
-HPS
HEAD of the Presidential Secretariat (HPS) and Cabinet Secretary, Dr. Roger
Luncheon yesterday announced that progress has been made with the
Administration's undertaking to establish a Protected Area System in Guyana
and to this end, a trust fund will be established in support of the system.
"Subsequent to the recently concluded final round of public consultations
with the communities in the identified areas, reports have been prepared,
submitted to the authorities, and examined," Luncheon told reporters at a
news conference.
"Influenced by those consultations, reports and relevant government
policies, the most preliminary outline of the intended legislation has been
submitted for government's attention," Dr. Luncheon said.
He noted that parallel with the examination of the outline on creating a
protected area system in Guyana, is the focus on the creation and management
of a trust fund to finance the operation.
Dr. Luncheon also contended that Guyana's commitment to establishing the
Protected Area System is supported by domestic and international
stakeholders who have remained focused on one of the main objectives of the
System -- to protect bio-diversity in Guyana.

Mangroved forests of South America

2008-04-12T11:32:00.000-07:00

Mangroved forests of South America
Stabroek News, March 25, 2008
http://www.stabroeknews.com/?p=360

VEGETATION AND SPECIES COMPOSITION
Mangrove forests in South America are found on the Atlantic and
Pacific coasts and in the bays and estuaries of eight countries. They
are distributed from the Praia do Sonho in the south (State of Santa
Catarina, Brazil) to the city of Sechura, along the Piura River
(Peru), where only monospecific forests are found (Avicennia
germinans).
A wide range of mangrove tree heights may be found in the different
countries of this region and even within the same country. While their
canopy cover rarely exceeds 20 m in height, tall trees of 45 to 50 m
may be found, for example in the 'Manglares Cayapas-Mataje' Ecologic
Reserve (Ramsar site) or in the states of Amapá, Pará, and Maranhão
(Brazil), where there are specimens of Avicennia spp. with a diameter
of about 1 m and trees of Rhizophora harrisonii reaching 40-45 m. In
these areas, mangroves extend up to 40 km inland and they remain
relatively unthreatened due to the inaccessibility and low human
population density. Well-developed mangrove communities are also found
in the delta of the Amazon River, where trees can reach 40 m in
height, sustained by high rainfall and by the river system itself. Due
to the extremely high inputs of freshwater here, mangroves have to
compete with local freshwater hardwoods, lianas and palms, which
restricts mangrove distribution in the area. The Pacific coast of
Colombia and the Orinoco delta of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela
have significant mangrove forests as well, with trees up to 30 m in
height, while 20-25-m mangrove trees have been reported in Guyana.
As is the case in North and Central America, mangrove forest structure
and species composition in South America differ from one coast to the
other. Colombia is the only country with both Caribbean and Pacific
coasts. More than 70 percent of its mangroves are found on the Pacific
coast, where they form well-structured, tall forests.
The lower rainfall and smaller tidal fluctuations of the Caribbean
coast limit forest development, and only small, narrow fringes of
mangroves are found (sometimes in the form of dwarf trees as in the
Guajira department). Notwithstanding these limitations, some
well-developed mangrove forests also grow along this coast, for
example in the Magdalena river estuary.
The mangrove tree species diversity of this region is low - only ten
native species (Table 13) - the lowest worldwide. Three species
(Avicennia germinans, Laguncularia racemosa and Rhizophora mangle) are
very common and are found in all eight countries; others, such as
Avicennia bicolor and Pelliciera rhizophorae, are found with less
frequency or their presence is uncertain.

MANGROVE RESOURCES: STATUS AND TRENDS 1980-2005
Mangroves in South America currently cover slightly less than 2
million hectares, down from some 2.2 million hectares in 1980.
About half the mangrove area of the region is found in Brazil - which
also has the third largest mangrove area in the world (Table 14 and
Figure 3, page 12). More than 90 percent is found in five countries:
Brazil, Colombia, the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, Ecuador and
Suriname (Figure 13). Guyana, French Guiana and Peru share the
remaining 140 000 hectares. The relatively small mangrove area in
these countries might be explained by the relatively small land area
(Guyana) or by the narrow and in some zones arid or rugged coasts of
Peru and French Guiana, which are not well suited to the development
of mangroves.
During the 1980s and 1990s, mangrove lands were often considered
unproductive and unhealthy. This attitude and the resultant activities
caused a loss of some 250 000 ha of mangroves in the region (11
percent of the 1980 extent) (Figure 14). This loss is low in
comparison with other regions, but can be significant at the national
and local levels, where rural populations often depend on mangroves
for subsistence and for commercial fishing.
In absolute terms, the countries that experienced the highest losses
of mangroves were Colombia, Ecuador, Brazil and the Bolivarian
Republic of Venezuela, all of them with more than 30 000 ha of
mangroves lost since the 1980s. In Colombia the extent of mangroves
has continued to decline over the past 25 years, even though the
annual change rate has decreased from -1.12 percent (1980-1990), to
-0.86 percent (1990-2000) and finally to -0.58 percent in the last
five years. Extensive conversion for shrimp ponds, development of
urban, industrial and tourist infrastructures and reclamation of land
for agricultural crops and pasture led to the loss of 90 000 ha since
the 1980s. Awareness of the importance of this coastal ecosystem is
now slowly increasing and some efforts in reforestation and/or
afforestation have been undertaken (2000) as a joint initiative by the
Ministry of the Environment (Ministerio del Ambiente), the Corporación
Nacional de Investigación y Fomento Forestal (CONIF), ITTO and local
communities.
One success story comes from Ecuador, where the significant losses of
the 1980s and 1990s (some 40 000 ha) are slowly being recovered and
the mangrove area now seems to be stable. The main cause of loss of
mangroves was the unsustainable development of shrimp ponds, which
started in 1966 as a small-scale activity. However, high international
demand converted shrimp into a major trade item, and Ecuador rapidly
became one of the largest producers in South America. The industry
brought significant gains to the country and to local populations,
becoming one of the economic activities with the most growth
nationally and in the region. The outbreak in Ecuador of the
white-spot syndrome virus (WSSV) had a tremendous impact on the
shrimp-farming industry. This impact, together with the activities of
several environmental organizations, the consequent abandoning of the
ponds, the ban on mangrove cutting implemented in 1994 and the
increase in field controls, favoured the natural recolonization of
mangroves in several places. The combination of these factors led to a
slight increase in the extent of mangroves from 2000 to 2005.
Brazil lost at least 50 000 ha of mangroves over the last 25 years,
mainly along the southern coast. The country still possesses
significant and relatively pristine mangrove forests, because most
mangrove areas are located in the less urbanized northern states.
No recent quantitative national data are available (other than the
1991 figures reported in Table 14). However, the relatively low
population pressure on the northern states and government efforts to
protect and rehabilitate damaged forests seem to have contributed to a
major reduction in the loss of mangrove area, which is estimated at
zero in the period 2000-2005. New and updated inventories are needed
to provide more detailed estimates for this country. It is hoped that
a recently approved Global Environment Facility (GEF) project
(Conservation and Sustainable Use of the Biodiversity of the Globally
Important Brazilian Mangrove) will contribute to filling current
information gaps.
Among the most significant causes of past losses and conversions are
the intensive use for timber production, urban development
(southeastern states) and to a lesser extent for fuelwood. Mariculture
(mainly shrimp farming) began in Brazil in the 1970s and it is now
widely practised - primarily along the coast of the northeastern
states (e.g. Ceará, Rio Grande do Norte) - and still represents a
significant threat to mangroves. The impact of this activity is a
national concern, mostly because of the consequent eutrophication of
the waters caused by the high emission of nitrogen and phosphorus and
the widespread illegal cutting of mangroves. In 2003 shrimp farms
covered approximately 13 000 ha, many of these adjacent to mangrove
forests, which has generally resulted in eutrophication of mangrove
creeks and tidal channels.
Intensive use of mangrove forests as a source of fuelwood, development
of urban and tourist infrastructures and conversion of land use to
agriculture appear to be the main causes of mangrove area changes in
the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, where more than 35 000 ha
disappeared in the past 25 years. Some additional losses and
degradation have been caused by oil spills. In this country, as well,
the government is now making efforts to protect these coastal
ecosystems.
In relative terms, the country that experienced the largest loss was
Peru (annual change rate 1980-2005: -2.42 percent), followed by
Ecuador (-1.19 percent), Colombia (-0.91 percent) and the Bolivarian
Republic of Venezuela (-0.60 percent). Mangroves in Peru have
traditionally been used for the production of fuelwood, charcoal and
poles. However, the main cause of their loss is uncontrolled clearing
for conversion of the land into shrimp ponds. This activity began in
the 1970s and soon became a major source of employment for many
farmers. For example, the industry led to the expansion of the city of
Tumbes, which has nearly doubled its population since the 1960s. The
logging of mangroves is now banned and this, together with the
increasing protection and control of the major mangrove forest in the
country (Santuario Nacional Los Manglares de Tumbes), may have led to
the reduction of the annual rate of loss, which appears to be close to
zero in the last five years (2000-2005).
French Guiana is the only country in the region that did not
experience major changes in mangrove area over the past two decades.
In this country, other forest types are used as the principal source
of timber/fuelwood, and no serious threats seem to pressure the
mangroves. Unfortunately, however, the area estimates for this country
had to be based on qualitative information, because no reliable data
were available since 1980 (Table 14). New inventories are needed in
order to have a clearer picture of the current extent of mangroves.
In Guyana, as well, updated inventories would contribute greatly to a
better estimate of the extent of the mangroves.

MAIN USES AND THREATS
Mangrove forests in South America have traditionally been used for a
wide range of purposes, and the local population still often rely on
them for their livelihood.
The collection of wood forest products is a common practice. Timber
and fuelwood are harvested from mangroves in Brazil, Colombia,
Ecuador, Guyana, Peru and the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela.
Production of charcoal from these forests seems to be less widespread,
but it is a traditional practice in Colombia, Ecuador, Guyana and
Peru. Extraction of tannin from the bark of mangrove trees (especially
of Rhizophora mangle) was previously a common activity in Brazil,
Colombia, Ecuador and Guyana, and contributed substantially to
supplying national industries.
Rural communities often rely on mangroves as a source of food and
additional income through the collection of non-wood forest products.
Molluscs, crabs and other crustaceans are collected for local use or
for national consumption. In Ecuador, for example, 2.0-2.5 million
molluscs are collected every month from mangrove forests (Spalding et
al., 1997). In Guyana, Avicennia germinans seeds are used as food.
Mangrove forests also indirectly influence the local economy by aiding
commercial and small-scale fishing activities, which in the Bolivarian
Republic of Venezuela, for example, have an important role in the
national economy.
Mangrove forests have been converted to other land uses, such as the
production of salt (Ecuador) or reclaimed for agriculture (especially
in Colombia, Ecuador and Guyana) or for urban and tourism development
(e.g. in Colombia and the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela). In
addition, as was described in the previous section, the conversion of
mangrove lands for shrimp ponds was a major cause of mangrove
destruction in past years, and even though this activity has been
reduced, it still represents a significant threat.
Awareness of the importance of these coastal ecosystems is growing,
but limited understanding of their services and benefits and lack of
harmonization and implementation of existing laws still represent
threats to mangroves. These forests continue to be under serious
threat also from increasing urban and industrial pollution (e.g.
Peru), the flow of pesticides to coastal zones (e.g. Suriname) and oil
spills (particularly in the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela). The
planning and construction of dams or changes in river flows upstream
are also current threats. These decrease the freshwater input,
consequently increasing salinity and reducing nutrients and sediments
transported to the coast.
Mangroves have a significant role in erosion and accretion along the
coastline. An interesting case comes from French Guiana. The entire
coast of this country is affected by the load dispersal system
associated with the mouth of the Amazon River (located some 500 km
east of the country), from which some 1 billion tonnes of sediment are
poured into the ocean every year. It is estimated that 10 percent
reaches the coasts as suspended load (Rudant, 1994). The mangroves
assist in trapping these sediments.

MANGROVE CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT
Awareness of the importance of these forests is slowly but steadily
increasing, and mangroves are under some form of protection in most
countries of South America.
However, illegal cutting and use is unfortunately continuing. Legal
protection of mangroves has a long history in Brazil, where the
earliest record dates from 1760.
The King of Portugal, concerned about the loss of potential sources of
tannin, issued an edict to restrict the cutting of mangroves for
fuelwood unless their bark was also used. More recently, the
government has published laws to conserve mangroves and to establish
12 new protected areas. In addition, projects for the conservation and
sustainable use of mangroves in protected areas are being prepared,
which could help reduce pressure on these forests.
Afforestation and reforestation activities have been undertaken (e.g.
in Colombia and Guyana). All South American countries with the
exception of Guyana have at least one Ramsar mangrove site, indicating
added political will to protect these habitats and their environmental
richness. However, more efforts could be undertaken at the national
and regional levels to implement appropriate strategies and
effectively protect these ecosystems. In Ecuador, after extensive
mangrove clearing during the 1970s, the government declared mangroves
protected forests in 1986 and prohibited cutting of mangrove trees in
1994. Forest protection policies and legislation exist in Guyana, as
well, although not dealing directly with mangroves. In Suriname
mangroves are protected together with other swamp forests in
multiple-use management areas, and in Peru, where mangrove clearing is
now prohibited, most mangroves have been protected since 1980 in the
Santuario Nacional Los Manglares de Tumbes, which was declared a
Ramsar site in 1997.

Guyana and Suriname would gain little from deforestation billions - new study

2008-04-09T09:18:00.000-07:00

Guyana Chronicle top story, Wednesday 09 April 2008

http://www.guyanachronicle.com/topstory.html
Guyana and Suriname would gain little from deforestation billions
- new study

OSLO, Norway (Reuters): A slowdown of deforestation from the Amazon to the
Congo basin could generate billions of dollars every year for developing
nations as part of a UN scheme to fight climate change, a study showed on
Monday.
But nations such as Guyana or Suriname, which have maintained high forest
cover, or others like Costa Rica and Chile, which have slowed or reversed
deforestation, would gain little.
Burning of forests by farmers clearing land accounts for 20 percent of world
greenhouse gas emissions. A 190-nation UN climate conference agreed in Bali,
Indonesia, in December to work on ways to reward countries for slowing
deforestation.
"Even with quite conservative assumptions, you can generate substantial
amounts of money and emissions reductions," said Johannes Ebeling of
EcoSecurities in Oxford, England, of a study with Mai Yasue at the
University of British Columbia in Canada.
They said a 10 percent decline in the rate of tropical forest loss could
generate annual carbon finance for developing nations of between 1.5 billion
and 9.1 billion euros ($2.4 to $14.30 billion) assuming carbon prices of
five to 30 euros a tonne.
Such curbs would represent about 300 million tonnes of avoided carbon
dioxide emissions a year -- about the amount of heat-trapping gases, mainly
from burning fossil fuels, emitted by Turkey, or half the total of France.
The United Nations wants reduced emissions from deforestation to be part of
a new long-term climate treaty beyond 2012 to help avert more droughts,
heatwaves, outbreaks of disease and rising seas.
Ebeling told Reuters that any credits for avoided deforestation would have
to be matched by tough restrictions elsewhere, for instance forcing
coal-fired power plants or cement factories to pay for right to emit carbon
dioxide.
The study, published in the British journal Philosophical Transactions of
the Royal Society B, said there were big challenges in designing a fair
system.
So far, most focus in the UN debate had been on rewarding countries with
high deforestation rates -- such as Brazil and Ecuador -- for slowing the
losses.
There were also problems such as judging the rate of deforestation or
creating controls to ensure that protecting one forest does not lead to
logging or clearance of another.
And some poor countries that could benefit -- such as Liberia or Myanmar --
may simply lack controls needed to regulate land use.
Still, Ebeling said he was optimistic a system could be worked out because
of a widening political willingness to address deforestation as part of a
new treaty to succeed the Kyoto Protocol beyond 2013.

Moths turn Essequibo villages into 'ghost towns' at nights

2008-04-09T08:41:00.000-07:00

Guyana Chronicle top story, Saturday 05 April 2008
http://www.guyanachronicle.com/topstory.html
Moths turn Essequibo villages into 'ghost towns' at nights

THOUSANDS of Kabli moths have invaded several villages in northern Essequibo
Coast causing residents to suffer severe itching.
When the Guyana Chronicle visited the villages on Thursday, several
residents of Bounty Hall said the situation is very serious because no
medication seems to stop the itching.
During the nights the villages are like a ghost town with no light as such
residents are calling for urgent help.
According to one resident, Carl Roberts, the very strange moths are
attracted by lights during the night and the dust from the moths which when
in contact with the skin causes terrible itching which results in tiny
bumps.
Mr. Roberts said children are also suffering and are crying when the moths
touch them.
Some of the villages currently under attack are West Bury, Bounty Hall,
Better Success, Andrews, Better Hope and Somerset and Berks.
Reports said the dangerous moths were last night seen as far as Devonshire
Castle, a village some four miles away from West Bury.
The breeding ground for the Kabli moth is the thick bushes on the foreshore
of the Atlantic Ocean between Bounty Hall and Cozier.
According to reports, persons are very afraid to go in the bushes to catch
crabs because of the moth.
Residents are calling on the Ministry of Agriculture to visit the area and
eradicate the dangerous Kabli moths and on the Ministry of Health to
urgently visit and provide medication to combat the itching.

UN to scale up security, renewable energy projects

2008-04-02T06:18:00.000-07:00

Guyana Chronicle top story, Wednesday 02 April 2008

http://www.guyanachronicle.com/topstory.html#Anchor-----------23817

UN to scale up security, renewable energy projects
- First meeting of UN regional heads ends in Georgetown
'It is wrong to continue with a system that gives incentives for
reforestation but doesn't give incentives to maintain forests' - Top UN
official
By Neil Marks
THE United Nations (UN) system is developing a security project here focused
on employment for youth and peace building and is also looking to expand
projects in renewable energy and make sure Guyana's voice is heard in the
global climate change debate.
<http://www.guyanachronicle.com/UN-Photo.jpg>
UN Assistant Secretary General Rebeca Grynspan speaks at a press conference
yesterday at the end of a meeting between regional heads of UN organisations
in the Caribbean and Latin America. Also at the head table, from left are
Director of the Caribbean sub-headquarters of the Economic Commission for
Latin America and the Caribbean Mr. Neil Pierre, Regional Director of United
National Children's Fund Mr. Nils Kastberg, Caribbean representative of the
United Nations Population Fund Mr. Harold Robinson, and head of the UN
system in Georgetown Mr. Aboubacry Tall.

The commitments came following an unprecedented meeting in Georgetown
between a twenty-member high level UN team and the government.
According to UN Assistant Secretary General Rebeca Grynspan, it was the
first time that the regional heads of the various UN programmes for the
Caribbean and Latin America were meeting together. The team comprised
fifteen regional directors and five deputy directors.
Head of the UN system here, Mr. Aboubacry Tall, said the UN's security
project would be complementary to the Citizens Security Programme and the
Security Sector Reform Project in efforts to maintain and preserve "peace
and civility."
He said the project, which is being developed with the government and civil
society, is geared towards three areas: skills training, entrepreneurship
development, employment opportunities for youths -- both at the community
and national level; enhancing the level of dialogue and trust within
communities; and supporting greater responsiveness of national institutions
in a way that makes the citizens feel more included.
Grynspan added that "in the exchange of views with the President, he
highlighted very strongly the importance of youth and youth employment and
youth training as very important centre for social policy and also in the
fight against crime."
In the area of renewable energy, she said that the UN system is committed to
expand on its small projects here.
"We think the UN system can do a lot to mobilize resources towards that goal
(finding renewable energy sources) in Guyana," she said at a press
conference held at the office of the United Nations Development Programme
(UNDP), Brickdam, Georgetown.
She said, in particular, the UN is looking at alternative energy projects
for isolated communities and also to avoid carbon emissions through the use
of fossil fuels.
Guyana is 100 per cent dependent on imported fossil fuels for
transportation. In 2005, the government spent US$220M on fuel imports, with
gasoline imports alone adding up to nine per cent of Gross Domestic Product.
In addition, she said the UN has made a commitment to ensure that Guyana's
voice is heard in the international climate change debate.
She supported Guyana's position that the post-Kyoto environmental compact to
offer support to countries that have preserved their forests.
"It is wrong to continue with a system that gives incentives for
reforestation but doesn't give incentives to maintain forests," Grynspan
declared.
She said the UN has offered to support Guyana's participation in the
international process, "for the voice of Guyana to be heard and to liaise
with the rest of the countries that take this view."
President Jagdeo has pledged to preserve the nation's pristine rainforest -
the size of England - if he gets partners willing to pay in the interest of
fighting further changes in the world's climate.
"We stand ready to work with any bilateral or commercial partner who shares
our vision of sustainable development where our long established and world
leading commitment to sustaining our forest can be matched by economic
rewards which support our national development efforts...," Mr. Jagdeo said
last October at a meeting of Commonwealth finance ministers

'We will all live to regret it' Professor Girvan warns that EPA could widen inequalities among CARICOM States

2008-04-02T06:17:00.000-07:00

Guyana Chronicle news item, Monday 31 March 2008

http://www.guyanachronicle.com/news.html

'We will all live to regret it'
. . . Professor Girvan warns that EPA could widen inequalities among CARICOM
States
<http://www.guyanachronicle.com/Professor-Girvin.jpg>
Professor Norman Girvan

JAMAICA OBSERVER - Leading Caribbean scholar of the political economy,
Professor Norman Girvan, has said the Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA)
between the CARIFORUM group and the European Commission could create wide
inequalities among CARICOM member states and fragment the Community.
Addressing the closing session of the ninth annual Sir Arthur Lewis
Institute of Social and Economic Studies (SALISES) conference at the
University of the West Indies, Mona, Friday evening, Girvan called the EPA
"an agreement we will all live to regret at a time not too far into the
future".
The EPA, which was brokered last December, gives Caribbean countries duty
and quota free access in goods (with the temporary exception of rice and
sugar) and services to EU, and is supposed to be the replacement for
preferential trade agreements.
Girvan's warning came as Antony Hylton, Jamaica's former minister of Foreign
Affairs and Foreign Trade, argued in an essay published on Page 13 of the
Sunday Observer that the Jamaican Opposition and Government should work
together on getting an amendment to the EPA, particularly the Most Favoured
Nation (MFN) Clause.
"Our concern about the scope of the agreement to cover areas not yet settled
in the CARICOM arrangements, for example, government procurement, are for
very much the same reason, that is, lack of resources to adequately meet the
challenges inherent in these far-reaching obligations," said Hylton.
"However, our greatest concern then and now is the severe limitation on
policy option by future governments implied by the 11th-hour acceptance of
the MFN Clause, proposed by Europe, and recommended for acceptance by Prime
Minister Golding to the rest of CARIFORUM governments in the dying moments
of the negotiations. The MFN Clause obliges Jamaica and its CARIFORUM
partners to give to Europe any more favourable treatment/benefit it gives to
a third party with which it enters into a subsequent agreement," added
Hylton.
Girvan, who was being honoured at the conference, said there was room for
possible conflict between the provisions of the EPA and those of the treaty
that formed CARICOM.
"The jury is still out on what happens if there is a conflict between the
provisions of governance for the EPA -- which entrenches a joint council of
the European Commission and the CARIFORUM states, and gives that council the
power to make legally binding decisions on the parties, who are obliged to
carry them out on pain of being submitted to the disputes settlement
provisions.
"And the jury is still out on what would happen if there is a conflict
between the organs of governance and the provisions of the Treaty of
Chagaramus and the EPA," Girvan said.
He said, too, that the wording of the EPA does not make clear when CARIFORUM
states can or should act individually or collectively.
"It states that the parties to this agreement are the European Commission
representing EU member states on the one hand, and CARIFORUM states acting
collectively on the other hand, but it also goes on to say, 'for the purpose
of this agreement the CARIFORUM states act collectively', but that where the
provisions of the agreement require the individual CARIFORUM states to
exercise their rights or to undertake obligations, the reference in the
document is to signatory CARIFORUM states," Girvan said.
He said the Caribbean had come to a metaphorical fork in the road. One path
(the CSME) led to greater regional integration "with the purpose of
exercising greater autonomy", and the other path (the EPA) led to "loss of
autonomy to shape our own future".
Girvan said greater regionalism should have existed before any sort of
agreement with the Europeans. Whether the Caribbean would actually ever be
in a position to change its fortunes, Girvan said, was left to regional
governments and time. He said part of the solution also lay in a
"reassertion of the intellectual space" and more critical, individual
thought, particularly among the young.
"In the words of [Marcus] Garvey, 'I want our people to think for
themselves'," Girvan said. In the words of [Lloyd] Best, 'We are at the
centre of our world'.
"In those of [George] Beckford, 'We have the resources in this region and we
have the ingenuity among our people to make of this region a veritable
paradise on this earth.'"

Wheeler hails UK/Guyana bio-diversity conservation cooperation

2008-04-02T06:16:00.001-07:00

Guyana Chronicle top story, Monday 31 March 2008

http://www.guyanachronicle.com/topstory.html
Wheeler hails UK/Guyana bio-diversity conservation cooperation
By Sarada Singh
<http://www.guyanachronicle.com/Wheeler-presents.jpg>
Wheeler presents in digital folder conservation seminar at Pegasus. British
High Commissioner to Guyana, Fraser Wheeler presents a representative from
the Ministry of Education Sean Mendonca the Wetlands School Pack. (Photo by:
Quacy Sampson)

BRITISH High Commissioner to Guyana, Mr. Fraser Wheeler has hailed the
milestone of the productive partnership between the United Kingdom (UK) and
Guyana in achieving the promises embodied within in the Convention on
Biological Diversity.
He was speaking Wednesday last at the ceremony to mark eight years of
Guyanese and British cooperation within the Darwin Initiative Wetlands
Project on conservation and development of its convention on biological
diversity.
To commemorate the occasion, a ceremony was held in the Savannah Suite of Le
Meridien Pegasus hotel which saw the presentation of project highlights and
discussion on the future of the North Rupununi Wetlands by prominent
individuals in conservation here.
Noting that biological resources support such diverse industries as
agriculture, cosmetics, pharmaceuticals, pulp and paper, horticulture,
construction and waste treatment, the High Commissioner said: "The loss of
biodiversity threatens our food supplies, opportunities for recreation and
tourism, and sources of wood, medicines and energy. It also interferes with
essential ecological functions such as natural flood control, and weakens
the ability to deal with natural disasters such as floods, droughts, and
hurricanes, and with human impacts, such as pollution and climate change."
He observed that already, countries such as the UK and Guyana are spending
huge sums in response to flood and storm damage; and such damage is expected
to increase due to global warming.
According to Wheeler, the UK is active in the world of bio-diversity at home
and abroad, and has the expertise and resources to help other countries
achieve their 2010 targets to halt the loss of bio-diversity.
He said the principal mechanism through which the UK supports other
countries in their obligation to the Convention on Biological Diversity is
through the Darwin Initiative.
The key objective of the Darwin Initiative is for the UK to work with local
partners in countries rich in bio-diversity but poor in resources to achieve
the conservation of biological diversity and the sustainable use of its
components and the fair and equitable sharing of benefits. Since March 21,
2007, 458 projects have been supported, totalling an investment of around 60
million pounds, of which six of these are in Guyana.
At the ceremony the results of the North Rupununi Wetlands Project were
presented which include: teacher and student resources for primary schools,
community and environmental officer courses, and a postgraduate course on
wetland management for the University of Guyana, the 2008 edition of the
NRAMP, a study of the impact of NRAMP to date, the North Rupununi Tourist
Guide and maps, and the North Rupununi Community website.
Chairman of North Rupununi District Development Board during his
presentation advocated the development and sustainability of the North
Rupununi Wetlands.
"We need to ensure that our actions promote the continued ecosystem
stability, and that the uses that are undertaken are sustainable and the
benefits that are derived from such uses do not escape the people of the
North Rupununi Wetland area. We are cautious of mother nature's retribution
when her resources are exploited in an irresponsible way based on our and
the experiences of others," Andries posited.
He also pointed out the need for global understanding of the importance in
maintaining the appropriate balance in the way the North Rupununi Wetland
ecosystem works.
"We cannot do this alone, as we are not in isolation. As a country we need
to make the right decisions that will ensure that this rich place that is
the North Rupununi Wetlands continues to provide the services not just to
the people who live there, but also the wider Guyanese and global
population," he explained.
The key objective of the Darwin Initiative is to draw on expertise relevant
to bio-diversity from within the United Kingdom, to work with local partners
in countries rich in bio-diversity but poor in resources, to achieve the
conservation of biological diversity; the sustainable use of its components
and the fair and equitable sharing of benefits. Among the contributions of
the Wetlands Project was during the year 2003 the Darwin Initiative approved
funding for the North Rupununi project.
The project also allowed the UK's leading institutions for biodiversity
conservation and education which includes the Royal Holloway University of
London, the Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust and the Open University to work in
partnership with Iwokrama, the North Rupununi District Development Board,
the University of Guyana, the Guyana Environmental Protection Agency and the
Ministry of Education.
The aims of the project were delivered in two phases with the first phase
implemented between 2003 and 2006 which involved assessing the health of
wetland habitats and communities in the North Rupununi, and developing a
process for the sustainable management of natural resources with the key
output of phase one being the North Rupununi Adaptative Management Process
(NRAMP).
Phase two implemented from 2006-2008, served to build capacity of Guyanese
stakeholders at both local and national level in executing the NRAMP process
by:
* significantly expanding the number of trained individuals in bio-diversity
monitoring and management;
* developing material for Guyanese university courses and schools to help
raise awareness of, and build capacity for, bio-diversity conservation;
* developing local, financially sustainable livelihood schemes, such as
eco-tourism, that have a linked objective to the bio-diversity monitoring
and conservation of key wetland habitats important to the local communities

Deal with Canopy Capital could see Iwokrama financially independent by 2010 - Glover

2008-04-02T06:15:00.002-07:00

Deal with Canopy Capital could see Iwokrama financially independent by
2010 - Glover
Stabroek News, March 30, 2008
http://www.stabroeknews.com/?p=274#more-274

The investment arrangement struck with Canopy Capital could see
Iwokrama financially independent in another two years, its board
chairman said yesterday.
The agreement between Iwokrama and Canopy Capital was made public on
March 27 at the world's first Biodiversity and Finance Conference in
New York. It opens the way for financial markets to price the 'utility
value' of the Iwokrama rainforests.
The forest and its services and eco-system would be put to dollar
value after a process of assessment and valuation. Canopy Capital is
injecting funding into the preservation and sustainable utilisation of
Iwokrama's forests in exchange for a share of the rights to eco-system
services it provides.
According to its website, Canopy Capital was established in 2007 to
drive capital to the rainforest canopy. It said that 20 per cent of
the company is held by the Global Canopy Programme, a UK charity
dedicated to the research and preservation of tropical forests. The
remaining 80 per cent is funded by a dozen international investors,
including the Waterloo Foundation.
"First of all I want to make it clear that the agreement with Canopy
Capital is not about carbon trading. That is not what Iwokrama wants
to do. What the agreement is about is measuring and then seeking to
place a value in the market place on the ecosystem services of
Iwokrama to humanity," Edward Glover, Chairman of the Iwokrama Board
of Trustees, said.
Glover said such services include rainfall and biodiversity. He said
the agreement will be creating additional income for Iwokrama to help
make the organisation financially independent of donors by 2010 and
this will be in accordance with Iwokrama's business plan. He said the
injection will help meet research obligations and continue to help the
local communities all of whom depend on the resources of the Iwokrama
forest for their livelihoods.
Glover said this was consistent with Iwokrama's role as a test bed,
having been established to test that conservation and economic
activity could be harmonious without destroying the environment.
He said Iwokrama would continue to do its very important research and
to measure and place a value on the services provided.
"This is a very important aspect. Humanity depends on rainfall and
biodiversity. This is just the kind of research opportunity that
Iwokrama will pursue in collaboration with other agencies in Guyana
and beyond," Glover said.
But he said that it will take time to advance the agreement. The
process of measuring was the first step, he added, and "we welcome the
help of Canopy Capital to enable Iwokrama to take this important work
forward over the weeks and months ahead."

Iwokrama on solid ground
Glover said Iwokrama's operational costs have fallen significantly as
a result of ruthless cost-cutting after facing reduction on donor
funding. The organisation's operational budget is between US$1.2M and
US$1.4M per annum.
He said business revenues have increased from 23 per cent in 2005 to
80 per cent in 2007 and further growth was forecast this year. Glover
was hesitant to disclose the amount of resources expected from the
Canopy Capital deal, but said it should steer the organisation out of
financial dependency by 2010.
After the 2001 terrorist attacks in the US, and the death and
destruction of the South East Asia Tsunami in 2004 and other natural
disasters, funding that once propped up organisations that focused on
the environment was diverted. When this happened, Iwokrama, which had
encountered hard times even before 2001, saw further reductions in
funding and has been struggling in the midst of instituting radical
cost-cutting measures.
Glover said ever since he took over as Chairman of the Iwokrama Board
of Trustees he made it clear that as a research institution "we are
ready to work with other agencies in Guyana to advance the knowledge
of sustainable management of the forests. We will continue to work
with all concerned in the months ahead in light of the agreement."
He said Iwokrama would be happy to work with organisations of any
description beyond Guyana in the months and years ahead. "We want to
show what is possible with Iwokrama," he said.
The Iwokrama project arose out of an offer in 1989 by then President
Desmond Hoyte at the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Kuala
Lumpur, Malaysia to have a million acres of virgin forests in the
centre of Guyana set aside for sustainable forestry studies.
The Chairman said implementation of the agreement between Iwokrama
and Canopy Capital and the preparation of the measuring phase of the
work was underway, but these preparations would take some time, since
they would be detailed measurements and analyses. "We are keen to get
a move on, but as we make progress we will have [more to report]," he
said.
He said the agreement would not interfere in any way with the other
areas of Iwokrama's business, namely sustainable forestry,
eco-tourism, forest management training and services.
Speaking to this newspaper yesterday, Minister of Agriculture Robert
Persaud welcomed the initiative and said it had the support of
government. "We recognise that Guyana and even Iwokrama [need
expertise] to market these resources," Persaud said. He said
government expects that the deal will give Guyana an opportunity to
ratchet up international support in seeking out eventual carbon
trading opportunities.
"We see this is as a catalyst [in our thrust against climate
change]," he said. He said government would have lent support to the
initial negotiations through its seat on the Board of Governors of
Iwokrama. The minister said that there continues to be ongoing
discussions between Government of Guyana and a number of parties
internationally, as a follow up to the recent Bali summit and
President Bharrat Jagdeo's offer to the world of Guyana's rainforests.

An inexcusable lack of professionalism

2008-04-02T06:15:00.001-07:00

Guyana Chronicle letter to the editor, Sunday 30 March 2008

http://www.guyanachronicle.com/letters.html
An inexcusable lack of professionalism

AS the President and major shareholder of Agri-Solutions Technologies Inc
(AST), I am writing with significant and grave concern regarding a number of
erroneous and malicious comments uttered in the media on the state of our
operations at the Wauna Oil Palm Estate in Region 1.
It is our intent to seek legal redress from the person(s) who have been
responsible for originating these damaging statements, but in the meantime
would like to inform the public of the fallacy of the media reports.
We would also like to register our consternation that reports in the media
regarding our operations are being made without the necessary steps being
taken to contact AST or its representatives. This is an inexcusable lack of
professionalism.
Statements apparently made by an opposition Member of Parliament on
television regarding our operations have since been also reported on the
radio. In addition, there have been many incorrect allegations reported in
the Guyanese media that:
** AST has significantly reduced the number of employees previously employed
by NEOCOL (the Government Entity which operated the estate before AST
acquired it) despite previous assurances to the workers.
** AST have been experiencing problems with their operations, and have been
unable to supply enough bio-diesel to the regional administration, resulting
in prolonged periods of blackouts being experienced in the Mabaruma
sub-region.
** AST, despite promises to the contrary, have not put any funding into the
estate, and have not commenced with the planned expansion of the acreage of
oil palm under cultivation.
** As the major investor involved, Mr. Dwarka Persaud is dissatisfied with
the investment and is seeking to return the estate to the Government of
Guyana.
We categorically refute all of these malicious allegations, and are taking
this opportunity to discuss and clarify the truth of our activities at the
Wauna Oil Palm Estate.
We became involved with this project when the estate was at an all-time low.
NEOCOL consistently operated at a loss for many years and up to the point
where AST acquired the estate.
In 2006, NEOCOL's sole purchaser of crude palm oil produced on the estate
refused to purchase any more. The estate faced immediate closure and
retrenchment of the some 66 permanent employees.
At the same time, the IAST, under the stewardship of Professor Suresh
Narine, had developed a local pilot plant to produce bio-diesel from a
variety of feedstock, among them crude palm oil.
Dr Narine approached and convinced us to invest in the development of a
bio-diesel Plant to convert the crude palm oil produced on the estate to
bio-diesel, so as to avoid the closure of the estate and the retrenchment of
the workers.
Over the last twenty years after leaving Guyana, we have had success in the
Plastics Reprocessing industry in Canada and the United States. However,
once we saw what Dr Narine was doing, we became (and continue to be) very
interested in the project because of its social impact in the region and its
potential to significantly benefit Guyana's energy sector, employment, and
development.
IAST was then contracted to build a commercial bio-diesel plant at the Wauna
Oil Palm Estate, and this plant was completed and commissioned in 2007.
IAST was also contracted to train the employees of AST in bio-diesel
production and quality control. Subsequently, the privatization unit of the
Government of Guyana, NICIL, negotiated a lease agreement and a Purchase and
Sale agreement of all movable assets to AST to take over the palm oil
production side of the business as well. In July, 2007, AST acquired the
entire estate.
Since July, 2007, AST has reclaimed the entire cultivated estate, as during
the NEOCOL operation, only a fraction of the cultivated estate was
harvested. This involved the hiring of a number of seasonal, part time
workers (23 individuals in total) to clear the growth that had taken over
the estate.
These workers were never hired as permanent staff, and indeed, during the
years that the estate had been operated by NEOCOL, workers who were employed
to clear undesired growth were always hired on an as-needed basis.
AST currently has some 76 permanent staff, approximately 10 more permanent
staff than was employed by NEOCOL. Furthermore, AST now provides daily lunch
to all of its workers on the estate, whether they are permanent or
temporary, as long as they show up for work. It is just one of the many
social impact programs we have planned for the project.
Now that we have cleared the existing cultivated acreage and can begin to
harvest a greater area of palms, we are also moving forward with a new
cash-crop cultivation project.
This will result in even more of the temporary pool of workers being hired
permanently. Furthermore, having restored the cultivated portions of the
estate to a useful and productive state, we are now embarking on a
significant increase of cultivated acreage, having secured a source of
competitive palm seedlings from Costa Rica.
Indeed, we have partnered with our seed supplier so that we can not only
supply ourselves with seedlings, but others in Guyana who are also
interested in palm oil cultivation. Our business plan, submitted to the
Government of Guyana as part of the privatization of Wauna, included a
schedule of investment activities, and we are well on target with those
activities.
We have increased our bio-diesel plant capacity significantly, this
expansion having been only recently completed. Furthermore, we have begun to
improve the physical plant on the estate - buildings have been renovated and
painted, the palm oil factory is going through significant overhaul, and we
have acquired more machinery to groom and maintain the estate.
In addition, soil and foliage on the estate have been evaluated by experts
both in Florida, USA and Ontario, Canada and we have incurred significant
expense to bring experts from Costa Rica to Wauna to assess the best
approach to the increase of our cultivated acreage.
We have ourselves visited plantations in Central America, again to assess
the best possible ways of approaching increased cultivation.
We have seen a reduction in palm oil production over the past five months,
despite harvesting a larger cultivated area of the estate. This is due to a
seasonal lean period.
However, we have not reduced the amount of bio-diesel supplied to the
region. Instead, at a significantly increased cost to ourselves, whenever we
have faced shortages of palm oil, we have resorted to the utilization of
petroleum diesel on the estate, so that we can supply the region with all of
the bio-diesel required for their needs.
We are committed to the partnership with the region, and despite the
difficulty in logistics, production, and distribution in a region as remote
as Wauna, we have been able to meet our commitments to the region.
We would like to point out that the operations with which we are engaged are
pioneering- we have, with the IAST's help, established the first and only
commercial bio-diesel operation in Guyana.
We have done so in a remote part of the country, and have had to train staff
members who were unskilled in this type of operation, all within a very
short timeframe.
In this type of endeavour, it is unavoidable that we will have challenges,
and that from time to time, we will encounter unplanned interruptions to our
activities. However, given the sterling performance of our workers and the
giant strides made, it is surprising and very sad to witness untruths being
propagated, apparently for narrow political gains.
We wish to let all of the political representatives in the Region know - we
are committed to this project, we intend for it to be a success, and we see
the most important resource in this endeavour as being the people of the
region.
We are prepared to sit down with members of the media and all concerned
stakeholders to work out collaborative approaches to real problems that may
arise in the future.
That said, we wish to inform all concerned parties that AST reserves the
right to a zero-tolerance approach to the propagation of malicious untruths,
lies and slander.
As for the reports that we are desirous of abandoning the project, let me
state emphatically: nothing is further from the truth. We are as committed
to this project now as we were at the beginning, and I am eagerly looking
forward to the expansion plans ahead.
Guyana is sometimes a difficult place to conduct business - particularly
when one is based thousands of miles away, as we are. I cannot say that we
have not faced significant challenges with bureaucracy, logistics, and
access to skilled labour. However, in Mr. Zahir Bacchus we have found a
capable and efficient General Manager, and we have been nothing but
delighted with the support we have received from the workers on the estate.
We urge the media and ill-advised Member(s) of Parliament to visit the
estate and interact with our workers. You will see firsthand the
improvements that have been made, and hear firsthand from our workers on how
they are treated, and how appreciated they feel in being a part of the
future of this estate. We will extend all hospitalities to those who wish to
take up this offer.
A small example may help -- the IAST was contracted by AST to operate the
bio-diesel plant they built for us, until our workers were trained.
IAST had to send in trained chemists from Georgetown on a rotating basis.
Now, our bio-diesel is produced by technicians who grew up in the Wauna
area. The young men who now produce bio-diesel under the supervision of Mr.
Bacchus (who is a trained Chemist) have been doing an absolutely wonderful
job. It is a small example of the plans we have for empowering the local
population at all levels of the operation.
We are doing our best, and our intentions have remained noble, and we
believe our performance has been exemplary since acquiring the estate. We
believe what we are engaged in is a project which can have a lasting
Guyanese national impact.
We therefore solicit the help of all elected public officials in the region
in addressing collaboratively any issues that we may encounter in the
future.
Politicians have a mandated role to play in the development of the economic
and social well-being of their constituents. We respect this role and
political process, and you will find that we will listen to your concerns.
However, we will also not tolerate miss-information, slander, and
politicization of our activities. It is an obtuse strategy to openly lie
about a situation which can be easily verified.
It appears there is deeper mischief afoot to thwart our activities, by
damaging our reputation maliciously. We wish to inform such detractors and
mudslingers that their untruths do not serve the employees of AST, the
residents of Wauna or even the progress of Guyana.
Dwarka Persaud
President/CEO
Agri-Solutions Technologies Inc.

Historic deal highlights forests environmental services -Iwokrama

2008-04-02T06:14:00.001-07:00

Historic deal highlights forests environmental services -Iwokrama
Stabroek News, March 28, 2008
http://74.54.141.82/?p=131#more-131
Iwokrama says that the deal reached with UK-based investment entity Canopy Capital has more to do with placing monetary value on environmental services that the rainforest provides while uncut, rather than just trading in carbon credits.
A press statement from Iwokrama said that the deal, announced yesterday at the world’s first Biodiversity and Finance Conference in New York, opens the way for financial markets to price the ‘utility value’ of rainforests.
“For the first time investors will pay for the ecosystem services produced by a rainforest, including rainfall generation, climate regulation, biodiversity maintenance and water storage - utilities with global significance which are vanishing as forests fall,” Iwokrama’s Chairman Edward Glover said in a statement. The deal was first reported in yesterday’s edition of the Independent newspaper in the UK
Iwokrama said that the transaction between it and Canopy Capital pioneers the use of risk capital to safeguard such services within the Iwokrama Reserve in Guyana.
Reuters reported yesterday that Canopy Capital has also bought rights to the carbon stored in the forest’s timber. It said that Hylton Philipson, Canopy Capital’s director and a former investment banker, hopes to sell the carbon storage and other rights at a profit within 18 months.
“It’s a new asset class,” Reuters reported Philipson as saying. “I think there’s a real appetite out there (for this type of investment. If you fly over the forest, you can see there’s no cloud coming off the cleared land.”
Acting CEO of Iwokrama Dane Gobin said that it would be some time before Iwokrama draws down on the valued resources in its rainforest.
He said that teams of scientists would have to visit the grounds to look at the stock levels.
“There is value, but it has to be monetised and a financial model [built],” said Gobin, adding that in a few months the stocking value will be determined. He said until that time, it will be difficult to say how much money Guyana will be receiving.
According to Gobin, with the injection from Carbon Capital, Iwokrama will be focussing on further research and environmental services, including medicinal plants and other non-timber resources, further advancing on the organisation’s business plan.
He said too that a part of the plan is Iwokrama’s sustainable harvesting of selected species of trees.
Iwokrama said that funds already secured from Canopy Capital will be used to continue the management of the Iwokrama forest in accordance with its philosophy of conservation through sustainable best practice, providing livelihoods and business partnerships for the 7,000 people living in the forest and the surrounding area.
Expressing community sentiments, Iwokrama Head Ranger Ron Allicock said “I love this place. This is my home. I want it to be around for my children, my children’s children, forever.”
Glover said that forests do much more for us than just store carbon.
“We should move beyond emissions-based trading to measure and place a value on all the services they provide,” he said.
Iwokrama said that this initiative fits perfectly with its original mandate to demonstrate that conservation, environmental balance and sustainable economic activity can be mutually reinforcing.
“Moreover, this first significant step is in keeping with President [Bharrat] Jagdeo’s visionary approach to safeguarding all the forests of Guyana.
It also ensures, with the Commonwealth’s support for Iwokrama, that the world hears a knowledgeable and persuasive voice on a matter of growing international concern” Iwokrama quoted Glover as saying.
Jagdeo last October had announced that Guyana stands ready with its rainforests to contribute to the fight against climate change.
The deal, drawn up by international law firm Stephenson Harwood, comes in the wake of a pivotal year for standing forests. The release said that the contribution of deforestation to runaway climate change has been recognised internationally and new measures to conserve forests are set to be included in a post-Kyoto framework after 2012.
Iwokrama said that the deal creates an investment template for first-movers in an emerging market for ecosystem services. “Such a market could generate billions of dollars for developing nations, making it more valuable to keep their forests standing than to cut them down,” the release said.
Gobin said that focus is returning to climate change and the environment after a hiatus that began soon after the US terrorist attacks in 2001 and the slew of devastating natural disasters which followed some years later.
He said that this shift in focus augers well for Iwokrama.
The Iwokrama project arose out of an offer in 1989 by then President Desmond Hoyte at the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia to have a million acres of virgin forests in the centre of Guyana set aside for sustainable forestry studies.

Investor buys Guyana forest's rain and carbon

2008-04-02T06:13:00.002-07:00

Investor buys Guyana forest's rain and carbon
Thu Mar 27, 2008 12:32pm EDT
http://www.reuters.com/article/environmentNews/idUSL2668925320080327
LONDON (Reuters) - The British-based investment firm Canopy Capital said on Thursday it had bought a share in the rain-making potential of a chunk of Guyanan rainforest bigger than the Mediterranean island of Mallorca.

The move is a novel twist in an investor frenzy to make money from the prospect of climate change that has also seen businesses snap up permits to emit greenhouse gases and invest in low carbon-emitting technologies.

Perhaps more lucratively, the company has also bought rights to the carbon -- a heat-trapping gas when released into the atmosphere -- stored in the forest's timber.

Canopy Capital is betting that global climate talks due to end next year in Copenhagen will agree a successor to the Kyoto Protocol that includes a legal format for paying developing countries to preserve their forests.

Deforestation contributes 20 percent of total greenhouse gas emissions. Scientists say the effects of global warming could reduce rainfall, and make it more irregular.

"It's a new asset class," said Hylton Philipson, Canopy Capital's director and a former investment banker.

"If you fly over the forest, you can see there's no cloud coming off the cleared land."

"I think there's a real appetite out there (for this type of investment)," he said.

The company said it would fund a "meaningful" chunk of the $1.2 million annual management budget for the 371,000 hectare (917,000 acre) Iwokrama reserve.

Pressure is growing for tropical countries such as Indonesia to be able to sell carbon offsets to rich countries in return for not destroying their remaining forests and so prevent more carbon entering the atmosphere. The concept is known as "avoided deforestation".

Philipson hopes to sell the carbon storage and other rights at a profit within 18 months.

"I would seriously hope to put something together of real value between now and Copenhagen with appeal to the wider investment community," he said, adding that the reserve would receive 80 percent of any profit.

"There is a road planned from Manaus to Georgetown that goes slap through the reserve. If you can generate income from standing trees, maybe people won't chop them down."

(Reporting by Gerard Wynn; Editing by Kevin Liffey)

Investor puts his money in the rainforest

2008-04-02T06:13:00.001-07:00

Investor puts his money in the rainforest
18:38 27 March 2008
NewScientist.com news service
Catherine Brahic
http://environment.newscientist.com/channel/earth/dn13549-investor-puts-his-money-in-the-rainfores

t.html?feedId=online-news_rss20
It is either a visionary piece of capitalism or throwing money into the wind. A venture capitalist today made a huge environmental bet – that one day the environment services that sustainable forests provide will be worth big money.

The Iwokrama reserve in Guyana is a 371,000 hectare chunk of tropical forest – roughly the size of Majorca – and is a successful experiment in sustainable forest management.

Hylton Murray-Philipson, director of the UK-based financiers Canopy Capital, has signed a deal with Iwokrama guaranteeing a "meaningful" contribution to their running costs for five years, a deal which may be renewed.

In return for these funds, Canopy Capital is given "ownership" of the forest's ecosystems services and a claim on any profits that might one day be made from them.

Zero deforestation

The value of the deal is undisclosed, but it is unprecedented. Murray-Philipson describes it as "creating wealth that is worth having".

Iwokrama is home to the same level of biodiversity as the neighbouring Brazilian Amazon but, unlike the Amazon, it is not disappearing. According to the UN Food and Agriculture Organization, between 2000 and 2005 the rate of deforestation in Guyana was 0%.

Logging in Guyana is selective, with only 35 of more than 1000 tree species logged commercially. The Iwokrama reserve itself operates a low level of logging equivalent of one tree per hectare each year on just half of its total surface.

Guyana's pristine forests as yet have no financial value. But they seed rain that irrigates farmlands as far away as the American Midwest, house thousands of species of plants and animals, including many rare ones, and store tonnes of carbon.

Unknown value

In November 2007, Guyana's president put his forests up for adoption in exchange for development aid. "What else has Guyana got to offer the global economy?" asks Murray-Philipson.

The trouble is, because of Guyana's excellent track record in forest conservation, no-one else seems to think the forests have any value.

"Let's not be idiots about these ecosystem services," says Niki Mardas of the Global Canopy Programme, "humans are getting a free ride." Mardas's organisation is a partner in the Canopy Capital deal and will receive 20% of any returns on the firm's investment.

Murray-Philipson reckons the forests are worth about $20 per hectare, although he admits he may never see a penny of return on his investment. He says the price tag is considerably less than what some companies are considering paying to store carbon under the sea.

'Winds of change'

Worked out in terms of carbon storage – the only ecosystem service to have some sort of value at the moment – it comes to $0.20 per tonne. Meanwhile, he notes that oil giant BP is looking at spending $50 to $60 a tonne on pumping carbon into disused oil fields in the North Sea.

"The winds of change have to blow through the canopy," Murray-Philipson says. "If I am wrong, we have a write-off, but at least we have tried to do something to change the paradigm of how man relates to nature."

"Rewarding people for good management is intrinsically more palatable than REDD [Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation] which rewards people for addressing a situation out of control," says Duncan MacQueen, a forestry expert at the Institute for Environment and Development in London, referring to a UN programme that was launched at the climate change summit in Bali, Indonesia, last December.

REDD aims to pay countries to reduce deforestation. The details need to be ironed out and the final agreement is not expected until 2009, but it looks unlikely that REDD will reward countries, like Guyana, that have a long-standing record for conserving their forests.

Iwokrama in revolutionary carbon deal -one million acres to be valued

2008-04-02T06:12:00.001-07:00

http://www.stabroeknews.com/index.pl/article?id=56541790

Iwokrama in revolutionary carbon deal
-one million acres to be valued
Stabroek News, Thursday, March 27th 2008

The Iwokrama International Centre for Rain Forest Conservation and Development is to announce a revolutionary deal in New York today that will see a financial value being assigned to the climate services it provides.

The UK's Independent newspaper reported last night that the deal with Canopy Capital will be unveiled today. Iwokrama had previously indicated here that a carbon credits deal had been under discussion with a UK company. Iwokrama officials could not be contacted last night for further information.

The Independent said that the deal "will place a financial value on rainforests - paying, for the first time, for their upkeep as `utilities' that provide vital services such as rainfall generation, carbon storage and climate regulation."

Since its conception in 1989, Iwokrama has struggled to stay financially viable but the recent global momentum towards valuing standing forests for their climate services has given it a new lease on life. The deal comes in the wake of an offer by President Bharrat Jagdeo of almost all of Guyana's forests in the battle against climate change. He made the offer here last year at a meeting of Commonwealth Finance Ministers.

Hylton Murray-Philipson, director of the London-based financiers Canopy Capital, who sealed the deal with the Iwokrama rainforest, told the Independent: "How can it be that Google's services are worth billions but those from all the world's rainforests amount to nothing?"

"Forests do much more for us than just store carbon ... This first significant step is in keeping with President Jagdeo's visionary approach to safeguarding all the forests of Guyana," Iwokrama's chairman and former UK High Commissioner to Guyana, Edward Glover told the Independent.

The deal, drawn up by the international firm Stephenson Harwood, is the first serious attempt to pay for the ecosystem services provided by rainforests, the report said.

Guyana's attempt to secure its entire standing forest has received the backing of the British environment minister Phil Woolas. According to the report, Down-ing Street has told The Independent that it is "considering the offer". President Jagdeo met with UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown on the fringes of the re-cent Commonwealth Summit in Uganda where they discussed the proposal.

The Iwokrama project arose out of an offer in 1989 by then President Desmond Hoyte at the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia to have a million acres of virgin forests in the centre of Guyana set aside for sustainable forestry studies.

Private equity firm buys rights to ecosystem services of Guyana rainforest mongabay.com

2008-04-02T06:10:00.000-07:00

Private equity firm buys rights to ecosystem services of Guyana rainforest mongabay.com
March 27, 2008
http://news.mongabay.com/2008/0327-iwokrama.html

A private equity firm has purchased the rights to environmental services generated by a 371,000-hectare rainforest reserve in Guyana. Terms of the deal were not disclosed, but the agreement is precedent-setting in that a financial firm is betting that the services generated by a living rainforest — including rainfall generation, climate regulation, biodiversity maintenance and water storage — will eventually see compensation in international markets.

In exchange for funding a "significant" part of the costs of maintaining Iwokrama rainforest reserve in Guyana, the agreement grants UK-based Canopy Capital the right to 16 percent profit from proceeds generated from environmental services payments. 80 percent of the income generated would go to local communities while the Global Canopy Programme, an alliance of 29 scientific institutions in 19 countries, would receive four percent.

While the environmental services market is presently limited to voluntary markets, investor interest is growing. Last December, Merrill Lynch invested $9M in rainforest conservation in Sumatra, expecting to eventually profit from the sales of carbon credits. Meanwhile in November, New Forests, a Sydney-based investment outfit, established a wildlife conservation banking scheme in Malaysia. The firm expects annual returns for selling "biodiversity credits" to developers to be in the 15-25 percent range. Canopy Capital hopes to do the same, while at the same time developing a market for the utility value of living rainforests.

Surveying the Iwokrama Reserve, 1 million hectares of pristine rainforest within the Guiana Shield. Photo (c) Samantha James.
"How can it be that Google's services are worth billions, but those from all the world's rainforests amount to nothing?" asked Hylton Murray-Philipson, director of Canopy Capital. "As atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide rise, emissions will carry an ever mounting cost and conservation will acquire real value. The investment community is beginning to wake up to this."

Canopy Capital's decision to fund rainforest conservation in Guyana in an interesting one: Guyana's low deforestation rate handicaps it in a market (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation -- REDD) that seems likely to reward high deforestation countries for reducing their rates of forest clearing. Still Guyana's president Bharrat Jagdeo has shown interest in environmental services — last fall he offered up the country's remaining forests as a giant carbon offset.

"We can deploy the forest against global warming and... it wouldn't have to stymie development in Guyana," President Jagdeo told The Independent last November. "We are a country with the political will and a large tract of standing forest. I'm not a mercenary, this is not blackmail and I realize there's no such thing as a free lunch. I'm not just doing this just because I'm a good man and want to save the world, I need the assistance."

The Keiteur Falls in the Iwokrama Reserve, Guyana
At the time President Jagdeo cited Iwokrama, a "sustainable-use" reserve that supports 7,000 people and locks up around 120 million tons of carbon, as a potential model for such payments.

"Forests do much more for us than just store carbon. We should move beyond emissions-based trading to measure and place a value on all the services they provide. This initiative fits perfectly with Iwokrama's original mandate to demonstrate that conservation, environmental balance and sustainable economic activity can be mutually reinforcing," said Iwokrama's Chairman Edward Glover. "Moreover, this first significant step is in keeping with President Jagdeo's visionary approach to safeguarding all the forests of Guyana. It also ensures, with the Commonwealth's support for Iwokrama, that the world hears a knowledgeable and persuasive voice on a matter of growing international concern."

The new deal offers hope to conservationists that Guyana's forests can be economically viable as intact ecosystems. Climbing prices for gold and timber, coupled with surging demand for biofuels derived from sugar cane, have raised concerns that developers may push for infrastructure improvements that could transform Guyana's forests.

"Saving rainforests can only occur through attracting significant capital flows, and the private sector is beginning to play a leading role alongside government and philanthropy," said Abyd Karmali, Managing Director and Global Head of Carbon Emissions at Merrill Lynch. "This deal presents a template for monetizing the benefits that come with the protection of standing forests. The preservation of ecosystem services in countries that choose to conserve their forests could become a billion dollar market."

Opportunities beyond carbon

While most investors are currently eyeing forests solely for their carbon value, Murray-Philipson believes they are overlooking more important services — especially rainfall generation.

Looking at only the value of rainforest for ensuring the flow of water to Brazil's dams, which provide the country with 70 percent of its electricity, Murray-Philipson calculates that environmental services are worth a minimum of $20 per hectare in Guyana. Factoring in carbon sequestration and other ecosystem services would significantly boost the value, he says.
"If I were a farmer in Brazil's Mato Grosso or the mayor in Atlanta I would be very concerned about deforestation in the Amazon," he told mongabay.com, referring to studies by Duke University's Roni Avissar that have linked forest clearing in the Amazon to rainfall in North and South America. "The market is looking at carbon but what I believe will be far bigger will be the maintenance of rainfall."

Murray-Philipson says that since there's no market for the services provided by rainforests, his firm sees the present as a good opportunity for investment.

"The market for these ecosystem services doesn't exist — therefore it can't go any lower," he said. "We see this as an opportunity to drive capital to the canopy."

Murray-Philipson believes that an "equitable and just" system based on the insurance market will eventually emerge as a vehicle for paying for environmental services provided by living ecosystems like rainforests.

"All my life I've been reading about rainforests going up in smoke and indigenous people disappearing. The most important thing that's been missing in the equation has been money. Now we have a real chance to engage and save rainforests."

"The Stern report estimated that it's going to take $15 billion per year to pay for the maintenance of tropical forests," he said. "While that number seems quite intimidating, it is actually incredibly doable. The other way of looking at it is the cost of not doing something is going to be significantly greater than whatever the cost of starting that trend of payments today."

Government has recognised the impact of climate change --Persaud assures Linden residents

2008-03-25T07:08:00.000-07:00

Government has recognised the impact of climate change
--Persaud assures Linden residents
By Sarada Singh
Guyana Chronicle, 24 March 2008
http://www.guyanachronicle.com/topstory.html#Anchor-----------30393

AGRICULTURE Minister Robert Persaud delivering brief remarks at the
Linden Constabulary Hall on the occasion of World Meteorological Day
yesterday assured the gathering that government has recognised the
impact of climate change and has undertaken several measures to deal
with the issue.

Minister of Agriculture Robert Persaud (second right), Regional
Chairman Mr. Mortimer Mingo (right) and an official from the
Agriculture Ministry interacting with residents of Linden yesterday.
(Photo by Carl Croker)
He noted that climate change is causing a major shift in our way of
life, be it at home, in the field or at work.

As such, he exhorted that people have to learn to adapt to different
residential locations because of the changing weather patterns. “We
have to modify our cropping pattern, our technologies and much more,”
he stressed.

Citing a recent example the minister referred to the overtopping on the
East Coast where 90% of the population is located and approximately 85%
of the activities take place.

Persaud yesterday met with residents of Region 10 (Upper
Demerara/Berbice) to commemorate the occasion under the theme,
“observing our planet for a better future”.

This year’s observance was held under the theme, “Observing our planet
for a better future,” and featured the launching of an ozone activity
booklet entitled, “Save our sky” provided by the World Meteorological
Organisation (WMO) which encompasses a compilation of several natural
hazards around the world.

According to the minister the situation on the East Coast emerged from
the current La Nina condition associated with easterly gusty winds
combined with the low pressure system in the Atlantic that is
generating wave action causing abnormal swells and excessive high tides
affecting the Caribbean.

Persaud also advocated the support of farmers/loggers during this
period by complying with the relevant authorities whenever advisories
are being issued in ensuring the safety of every individual.

More so, he noted that some $13.5 M has been allocated for the
well-being of farmers in the Region.

The minister added that the process of getting the entire sector to
understand and prepare for the fallouts caused by climate change on
agriculture will have to be accelerated. “Nations such as ours must
intensify lobbying of those responsible for the greatest contributions
to global warming and climate change causing them to change their
attitude. They must recognize that they have a moral obligation to help
the countries that are affected most by global warming, countries like
ours that lie below a rising sea level and with limited resources to
defend ourselves against damages caused not by us but contributed by
others with greater economic wealth,” Persaud said.

“We also in Guyana, are now confronted with and are experiencing an
inconvenient reality,” the minister pointed out.

Chief Hydromeoteorological Officer (ag) Ms. Bhaleka Seulall noted that
this year’s theme is by no means a casual occurrence referring to the
year that has elapsed since the previous World Meteorological Day where
a number of crucial events have occurred, all of which have strongly
emphasised the vital and unprecedented relevance of global
observations.

She added that the provision of weather, climate and water-related
information is essential to support the socio-economic activities, such
as agriculture, transport, mining, energy production, aviation and
water resources management, all of which are crucial for the growth and
development in any country.

Ms. Seulall also appealed to the Guyanese community to contribute a few
minutes of their time so as to ensure that the Hydrometeorological
Service can effectively expand the weather, climate and water database
which will ultimately aid in improving weather predictions both locally
and internationally.

“We should begin to act locally and think globally,” she acknowledged.

World Meteorological Day celebrates the convention of the World
Meteorological Organisation (WMO) which was entered into force on March
23, 1950, a date that is celebrated annually by the meteorological
community.

Ramesh Dookhoo elected GMSA President

2008-03-25T07:06:00.000-07:00

Ramesh Dookhoo elected GMSA President
Kaieteur News, 20 March 2008

Banks D.I.H Executive, Ramesh Dookhoo, has been elected President of
the Guyana Manufacturing & Services Association Ltd. (GMSA) for
2008-2009.
He was elected at the first meeting of the Board on Wednesday
following the Association’s Annual General Meeting held last Thursday
at the GMSA’s Headquarters at the Sophia Exhibition Complex. Dookhoo
previously served as President from 2002-2004.
Terry Holder of the Guyana Telephone and Telegraph Company is the
First Vice President while Anthony Ross of Sterling Products was
elected as Second Vice President. Autamaram Lakeram of National Milling
Company of Guyana is the third Vice President.
Expressing his appreciation for the confidence the Board had expressed
in him, Dookhoo acknowledged that there was a great deal of work to be
done by the Association, operating as it does in a challenging business
environment.
He emphasized the need for the established Committees to function
effectively and stressed the importance of the work of the Trade and
Investment and the Policy and Legislative Committees. He called on the
Chairmen of the various sub-sectors to take effective control of those
areas.
The Chairs of the various sub-sectors are Ross (Agro-Processing),
Somat Ali (Construction & Engineering), Major General (ret’d) Norman Mc
Lean (Minerals & Related Industries), Neil Fraser (Services), Mr.
Rustum Bulkan (Forestry and Wood Products) and Jimmy Lorrimer (Printing
& Packaging). The Chairs of the Chemicals and Pharmaceuticals
sub-sector and Textiles and Sewn Goods sub-sector are still to be
nominated, GMSA said in a press statement yesterday.
The other members elected to the Board at the AGM were George
Robinson, Oscar Phillips, Clement Duncan, Fitzroy Fletcher, John
Peroune, Earl John, Jocelyn Dow, Peter Pompey, Raymond Ramsaroop and
Mark Bender.

STOP IT!

2008-03-19T09:23:00.001-07:00

Guyana Chronicle editorial, Wednesday 19 March 2008

http://www.guyanachronicle.com/editorial.html

STOP IT!

Minister Carolyn Rodrigues had the cohones to tell those who strategically
marginalise their supporters by inculcating and infusing into their
collective psyche the fallacious contention that they should not strive,
they should not endeavour, that everything should be handed to them at the
expense of the State, not to mess with the heads of the people for whose
welfare and protection she primarily holds the portfolio, as well as the
mandate covered by that portfolio, to represent their interests in the
highest law-making forum in the land.
And she should rightly be lauded for her unequivocal stand that she does not
see it fit that they should be encumbered with the profile of beggars or
bullies in the national social, political, or economic framework.
The indigenous peoples of this land are resourceful and resilient. They have
lived and thrived without any real national recognition of their needs and
have historically been sidelined within the context of Guyana's nationhood.
However, with the establishment of the Ministry of Amerindian Affairs within
recent times, they are now taking their rightful place within the national
collective.
Their products, culture, and their knowledge of the flora and fauna peculiar
to Guyana's rainforests and the topography of the hinterland have proven
invaluable to Guyana's drive in eco-tourism.
Derisively labelled "Buckman," the Amerindians have been stigmatised as
backward and social misfits. Today, with equal access to education,
healthcare, communication and other facilities Guyana's indigenous peoples
are proving that they can hold their own in any area of endeavour, so it
would be a tragedy if this merger and cohesion into the national dynamic
goes in tandem with the simultaneous removal of the peculiar qualities that
contributed to their survival in Guyana's jungles.
While teaching a man to fish he needs to live until he learns the technique
adequately enough to survive on his own skills, so allocations to the
indigenous communities are not intended to encourage a culture of beggary in
their expectations; but to aid in and facilitate the transitional process
whereby the doctors, lawyers, engineers and other skilled and trained
professionals will emerge to serve their communities and the nation.
Government should not blame in totality the misguided Guyanese who prefer to
sit in idleness and complain, or even worse, take a gun and kill and rob
someone else who preferred to work and earn his keep. Entire communities
prefer to complain and lament about marginalisation and discrimination
because the leaders they trust and respect have taught them to think in this
way as this is conducive to having at their disposal enough disgruntled
people with perceived injustices to create trouble in the land when called
upon.
The people in these communities have access to the same facilities as other
communities, with an added advantage. Many have extensive yards which are
taken over by weeds. No one with that amount of land should go hungry, but
laziness and indolence can lead to real poverty. People from other
communities augment their incomes by cultivating kitchen gardens and rearing
poultry, the excess of which they sell.
Our ancestors cleared jungles to create farmlands with the most rudimentary,
if any, tools. Today, when there are support systems to encourage
agriculture and a voracious and expanding global market why should people
with so much land cry marginalisation?
All the communities on the East Coast corridor should be allotted backlands
cleared (not dams) for agricultural purposes, even if in a co-operative way,
in partnership with the New Guyana Marketing Corporation (GMC) and Ministry
of Agriculture. The opportunities for self-employment would be greatly
enhanced in this way.
So kudos to Minister Rodrigues for attempting to nip in the bud attempts to
infuse a culture of slothfulness, beggary, and bullyism into her people

Plans to promote Iwokrama locally on the way - Minister Prashad

2008-03-19T09:19:00.003-07:00

Guyana Chronicle news article, Wednesday 19 March 2008

http://www.guyanachronicle.com/news.html

Plans to promote Iwokrama locally on the way - Minister Prashad

A PROMISE was made last year for tourism to become a significant contributor
to Guyanaxs economy.
This was said by Minister of Tourism, Industry and Commerce, Manniram
Prashad at the 2008 presentation of the national budget.
The major objective of the historic round table conference -- Moving
Guyanaxs Tourism Forward, that was organised by the Ministry of Tourism,
Industry and Commerce, was to develop innovative ways to propel the countrys
tourism drive.
The conference was attended by 200 participants from all across Guyana and
resulted in a more aggressive promotional strategy of Guyana, Minister
Prashad said.
The direct result of the conference was the initiative to promote Kaieteur
National Park by making it accessible to local Guyanese.
This initiative resulted in the park seeing an increase by 64 percent in
visitor arrivals in 2007. Plans are also on the way for special incentive
package to be continued for Kaieteur National Park.
Minister Prashad noted that consultations are ongoing with the various
stakeholders to ensure that the reduced package is offered to local
Guyanese.
A similar initiative will be taken to promote the Iwokrama International
Centre.
Minister Prashad noted that, This year deliberate efforts will be taken to
market Iwokrama.
Special incentive packages will be offered by local tour operators so as to
make the visit to Iwokrama more affordable.
He further noted that a meeting will be held with the management of
Iwokrama, the local tour operators and the Ministry of Tourism, Industry and
Commerce to put together an affordable package.
The construction of a new airstrip at Iwokrama will provide easier access to
the centre. However, as this is still very costly, bus tours to the centre
will be introduced so as to allow local Guyanese the opportunity to
experience the wonder of Iwokrama.
Minister Prashad also mentioned that this initiative is in keeping with
President Jagdeoxs call after the last historic round table conference for
affordable domestic tourism. The Minister stressed that this package will
only be available to local Guyanese because they would like Guyanese to see
the beauty of their country.
Iwokrama is an international centre for rainforest conservation and
development, it manages one million acres of forest in central Guyana . The
centrexs main objective is to show how tropical forests can be conserved
while sustainably being used to provide ecological, social and economic
benefits to local and international communities.
One of the major components of Iwokramaxs drive for financial self
sufficiency is eco-tourism.
Iwokrama possesses a rich biodiversity, as such it has immense ecotourism
potential. It offers visitors the opportunity of an exceptional natural and
cultural experience in the heart of Guyanaxs rainforest.
Features of Iwokrama include the only state-of-the-art canopy walkway in the
entire Guianas, birdwatching with over 500 species of birds, jungle trekking
through one of the nine designated trails, guided nature walks, nocturnal
wildlife spotting by vehicle, foot and boat, Indian island sunrise boat
ride, and coming soon the butterfly farm where visitors can enjoy a guided
tour of the farm, viewing at least ten different species, and learn the
Amerindian technique of using a bow and arrow.
A special tourism incentive package will be announced in three weeks time to
allow Guyanese the opportunity to visit Iwokrama. (GINA

We must start taking climate change seriously now and plan ahead

2008-03-19T09:19:00.001-07:00

http://www.stabroeknews.com/index.pl/article?id=56541295

We must start taking climate change seriously now and plan ahead
Stabroek News, Tuesday, March 18th 2008

Dear Editor,

Ideally, I do not venture into areas in which I am ignorant. However, I
will make this an exception. I have just come out of a climate change
and governance workshop in London, part of the Commonwealth Day
celebrations and wish to endorse the sentiment of Mr Clairmonte Lye.

We cannot continue to sit in ignorance of climate change and like some
of the Pacific Islands hold on to a perverse incentive to just 'wait
and see' and when disaster strikes, expect the international agencies
to rush to our assistance. This is not to say that the rest of the
world is far ahead of us either as it seems that only a few are
prepared to take the issue of climate change seriously and it is hoped
that a change in the US presidency will lend support to an
international regime which can seriously commit to sustainable
development.

I am glad that in Guyana's case, while civil society seem blissful in
their ignorance or silence, the President is awake and has even had
climate change on the Commonwealth Ministers of Finance meeting agenda
last year. But we need civil society fully on board as it is the only
way we can sustain interest and voice on the issue.

Why am I suddenly awake? The answer simply is a woman called Meredith
Hooper (author of The Ferocious Summer, named as the Daily Mail Science
Book of the Year in 2007) witnessed first hand the effects of global
warming - higher temperatures in the Antarctic peninsular, which means
more snow (as a result of warmer air holding more moisture) which
affects the breeding grounds for the penguins (Adelie) while the
melting ice sheets as a result of the warmer air changes the salinity
in the water and drives away the shrimp like krill on which the
penguins feed. We never saw dinosaurs. Our great grandchildren may
never know what penguins look like.

But that is not all. It is not just that the weather patterns change
and there is heat when there should be snow/rain and there are
unexpected storms and heatwaves which are all dictated by the waves and
currents in the ocean. It is not just that the sinking ice sheets mean
that the level of the sea will rise and the islands in the Pacific and
countries under the sea will be inundated and people will need to
relocate. The frightening reality is that the food that we consume
depends on our geographical characteristics. For example, in Guyana, we
depend on rice and sugar as our main exports and these are planted and
harvested according to our traditionally two main seasons.

We have witnessed first hand how these seasons have changed in the past
few years and how these and other crops have been devastated by floods,
excess rainfall and drought. Did we link it to climate change?

Now just imagine if the world continues along this path of development,
without factoring the environment as one of its factors of production
to be used sustainably and carbon emissions continue unabated in the
race to develop faster. We will have a world of superpowers clashing
with hundreds of new factories and cars with the backlash of rapidly
changing weather patterns of heat and snow/rain and higher sea levels.
There will be less sea food as the water salinity changes and less
crops as the periods of harvests become sorter or populations have to
move to different locations which will affect the crops actually
cultivated.

The population explosion has not helped as it demands products which
consume trees or the clearing of the trees (which breathe in very
carbon dioxide). What does this mean in the distant future? The weather
changes will consume low lying land. Its effect on crops and sea food
will be such that there will be a diminished supply of food, and much
of the world will have to go without food especially the poorer
countries. Food prices will go up and we will be in a situation which
we never imagined possible.

I remember Charles Ceres telling me just after the 2005 floods that
Guyana needs to shift its capital into the interior as in another 20
years, the coastland will be under water. I heard, but like many
others, I did not take it seriously. The government will shore up the
sea defences and we will all be happy.

Guyana needs to start planning ahead. We can kill each other in
politics, but there will be nothing to fight over in another 50 years
if we do not act now. There is need for a strong public relations
campaign so that farmers do not destroy the waterways in the use of
fertilizer and pesticides, so that residents are aware of the dangers
posed by mining and logging and the other economic activities.

Climate change in effect means that even renewable resources will
become less renewable.

Guyana needs to be in a position of strength to bargain in the trading
of emissions for its own development. It needs its people behind it.

As the Pacific Islands are finding out, they are not being taken
seriously by the west because they simply do not matter in the
hegemonic scheme. Guyana has its forests on its side and we need to
leverage that. The government needs to seriously consider its
investment programme, including its housing programme and public sector
investment programme and how this affects catchment areas for water
which compromises drainage. And civil society, of course, needs to be
on board, ever alert.

As Meredith said, when the rain comes heavier than usual it does not
come with a label 'this one is as a result of climate change'. The
climate has been undergoing changes for a long, long time. What we are
seeing now is an acceleration of that climate change. It was in the
1940s when the UK stationed its Royal Navy in Antarctica but could not
leave them there with nothing else to do, that they were given
instructions to monitor the temperature every three hours. It was only
in the 1990s with the wide use of computers that the data was assembled
into a programme and someone decided to see what the trend was and
discovered that the temperature was rising. The temperature will fall
and it will become hotter. That is the reality of climate change.
Whether the heat is a result of more greenhouse gases or more heat
being felt from the sun is a matter for scientists to decide but we are
reeling from its effects.

It is a wake up call. Of course nature has a way of healing herself.
She will. But at what price? The BBC website (science & nature) is
educational on what earth looked like millions of years ago, what plant
life existed and what animals were there. We seem headed to change the
face of the earth for another few million years.

Yours faithfully,

Gitanjali Singh

Corporate Social Responsibility

2008-03-19T09:18:00.001-07:00

http://www.stabroeknews.com/index.pl/article?id=56541047

Stabroek News, Business Editorial
Corporate Social Responsibility
Friday, March 14th 2008

Last Wednesday the Canadian High Commission in Georgetown hosted a
forum on Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), a concept that has
gained considerable ground in recent years in the global discourse on
the issue of desirable operating practices in the international
corporate community.

In practice CSR is about the infusion of socially acceptable practices
into corporate behaviour. The refinement of the concept is linked to
studies on the nexus between various forms of socially responsible
behaviour and the growth, development and even the survival of people
and communities.

Canada being a country that is well-known for its large and
technologically advanced mining sector, the forum placed the discourse
on CSR within the framework of the desirability of environmentally
friendly practices in the mining sector, recognizing at the same time
that CSR embraces the behavioural practices of the corporate community
as a whole. It is no secret, of course, that the global mining and
resource extraction practices are facing a range of social challenges
arising out of divergent views on the impact of mining on communities
and the environment. The case for the sector's track record on socially
responsibly practices is often weakened by numerous examples of
environmental degradation and economic exploitation and abuse of the
human rights of indigenous communities.

The tenets of CSR oblige mining operations to pursue their extraction
of minerals in such a manner as to ensure a mindfulness of the need to
protect and preserve the environment and a sensitivity to and support
for the social, cultural and economic interests of host communities -,
in most cases, indigenous communities and that, in considerable
measure, is what last Wednesday's forum addressed.

While the concept, in its purest form, derives from a voluntary, "good
citizen" approach to socially responsible corporate behaviour - though
it should not be confused with corporate philanthropy - it has now
become enveloped in a strong element of compulsoriness, a circumstance
that has resulted from increasing global emphasis on issues like
environmental protection, human rights, the rights of indigenous
peoples and the right of workers to fair wages and safe working
conditions. In fact, it is largely because issues like these have
assumed an increased global significance that CSR has been
incrementally refined to a point where it has become a 'discipline' in
its own right.

While it is probably reasonable to assume that there are business
enterprises that have for years been quiet adherents of CSR long before
the term was even 'invented', the elevation of CSR to its current
exalted status and the element of compulsoriness derive, at least in
part, from a realization that issues like the preservation of the
environment and the protection of people's rights, including the rights
of indigenous peoples, are too important to be left to the altruism of
the corporate community whose primary focus, after all, is profit.

But that is not all. The concept of CSR is premised on the perfectly
sound argument that environmentally friendly operating practices and
respect for the rights of workers and host communities - in the mining
and forestry sectors, for example - can actually create a more socially
and economically sustainable working environment. In other words, CSR
is good for business.

The degree to which CSR has become institutionalized in the global
business environment is manifested in the fact that agreements between
countries and major international mining and forestry entities actually
contain clauses that bind companies to various forms of socially
responsible behaviour particularly in relation to the environment and
interaction with host communities.

Guyana has followed this trend in its contractual agreements with
mining and forestry companies. As far as we can tell there has been an
acceptable degree of adherence to CSR by expatriate companies even
though there are examples of mining undertakings by expatriate
companies that pose environmental challenges.

The same level of compliance with CSR standards is of course not
evident in some locally run mining operations where self-regulation
simply cannot be relied upon and where logistical considerations make
official monitoring and enforcement difficult.

A good example of the challenge that we face in domestic mining
operations lies in the recent incident in Region Eight where roads were
dug up, water pipes displaced and an entire community discommoded as a
result of irresponsible mining activity.

This of course gives rise to another issue. While the importance of an
environmentally responsible approach to mining (and logging) operations
can hardly be overstated, questions arise over Guyana's ability to
effectively enforce responsible practices in those sectors and
particularly in the mining sector.

Prime Minister Samuel Hinds who speaks for the mining sector in the
National Assembly is not unaware of this dilemma though one suspects
that his 'report card' of "eighty to ninety per cent good" and "ten to
twenty per cent bad" as far as responsible mining practices by local
operators is concerned, errs on the side of considerable generosity to
the local miners.

Incremental hinterland development and the increasingly important role
of the mining (both gold and bauxite) and forestry sectors to the
country's economy are bound to place increasing pressure on both the
government and the corporate community to take a more serious look at
incorporating the tenets of CSR into the wider interior development
strategy. Here it is not just a question of protecting the environment
and respecting people's rights. It is also a question of adhering to
internationally acceptable CSR standards failing which, as the
international CSR lobby intensifies, we may well find ourselves
confronting economically damaging sanctions.

Beyond the mining sector, of course, there are other issues that
surface within the CSR frameworkâ€¦â€¦â€¦ like the questionable nature
of health and safety practices in several public and private sector
workplaces, the poor record of several local businesses as far as the
remittance of employee NIS contributions is concerned; and the piles of
garbage derived from commercial activity that litter our streets and
clog our drains.

One hopes, of course, that the initiative by the Canadian High
Commission serves as a precursor to the creation of a strong and
enforceable policy framework for CSR in Guyana given the importance of
socially responsible corporate behaviour to the country's social and
economic advancement.

What we do not want is for CSR to become a clichÃ© out of which emerges
a host of 'experts' and a mind-boggling body of academia that places
the issue in a thicket of time-consuming and meaningless discourse that
loses sight of the importance of expeditious implementation of socially
responsible practices in the local corporate community.

Luncheon leads PRSP consultation discussions on governance

2008-03-19T09:14:00.000-07:00

Guyana Chronicle top story, Tuesday 18 March 2008

http://www.guyanachronicle.com/topstory.html
Luncheon leads PRSP consultation discussions on governance

THE Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) consultation on Governance and
Security was held yesterday at the Umana Yana in Georgetown. Leading the
discussions was Head of the Presidential Secretariat, Dr Roger Luncheon.
In his discussions, Dr Luncheon pointed out that several areas had been
highlighted during the consultation for the 2001 - 2006 period.
These included administration and issues to do with transparency and
accountability. In this regard, legislation had been enacted to deal with
the ambiguities and to repose statutory responsibility in individuals and
agencies to overlook these matters.
He pointed to the Public Procurement and Tender Board Act which gives
oversight to a number of persons holding Constitutional offices with
Parliament as the final oversight body.
The HPS acknowledged that there will always be concerns as to whether
management of public funds could be greater enhanced and the PRSP
consultations were meant to address those issues.
With regard to public administration, Dr. Luncheon said that some of these
issues were already addressed beyond what was recommended at the
consultations.
The creation of autonomous and semi-autonomous agencies were meant to make
their service delivery more efficient.
Dr Luncheon said, too, that in the area of political administration, it was
made mandatory for all public officers and Government functionaries to
declare the assets of themselves and their immediate family.
The issue to be resolved is the manner in which this declaration should be
made and what should be done with it. This, he said, is an issue that could
be decided by these consultations.
The need for Parliamentary reforms was also raised at the last consultation.
The steps taken so far included the strengthening and creation of
Parliamentary Committees, Rights Bodies and Commissions and giving them
oversight into the management of several functions of the State.
He acknowledged that all that was recommended was not achieved but said that
the changes to be realised was a 'work in progress'. There was an identified
need to have civil society more involved in the work of the State and
efforts will be made to address that.
Addressing the gathering, trade unionist Carvil Duncan acknowledged that
progress was taking place in the society.
These benefits, he said, will be felt as communities begin to reap the
rewards in the various social sectors.
Joseph Hamilton, of the PNCR, who attended in his capacity as a citizen,
expressed concern that the impact of the developments were not being felt in
the communities since there may be a disconnect between the consultations
and the 'ordinary citizens' and they may not be seeing immediate progress.
He suggested that community leaders be used to convey development plans to
communities.
Presidential Adviser on Governance, Ms. Gail Teixeira, in her contribution
stated that several safety net programmes that were implemented by
Government were not being accessed by the intended recipients since they did
not know about the programmes. She suggested that funding should be provided
for sensitizing persons about these programmes.
Additionally, surveys should be done on a regular basis to determine the
effectiveness of government services and programmes.
She also suggested that contracts for works in communities should be posted
up in public places in the communities so that persons could see the scope
of works and be the watchdogs of the government.
In wrapping up the discussion, Dr Luncheon admonished that the role of law
in conflict resolution and creating the conditions for poverty eradication
should never be overlooked. He said that the recent incidents in Lusignan
and Bartica have proven that there is a "mobilizable" force which could
contribute to the development of Guyana.
The PRSP consultations started in January and should have been completed in
three weeks but the massacres in Lusignan and shortly after in Bartica
caused them to be delayed. (GINA)

Where do Messrs Persaud and Chand stand on the withdrawal of the subvention

2008-03-17T12:47:00.002-07:00

http://www.stabroeknews.com/index.pl/article?id=56541229

Where do Messrs Persaud and Chand stand on the withdrawal of the
subvention
Stabroek News, Monday, March 17th 2008

Dear Editor,

I hope the political parties, Critchlow Labour College , trade unions,
the media, and other stakeholder bodies will continue to demand that
the government engage in equitable distribution of the State's
resources. Many have said it, but it needs to be repeated that the
money the government refuses to give to the students of the College is
taxpayers' money.

Mr. Robert Persaud, Minis-ter of Agriculture was a student of the One
Year Indus-trial and Social Studies Program. I know, I saw him there.
He used this opportunity to improve his education that allowed him
entry to the University of Guyana where he read for the Communica-tion
degree, which later led to his Master at the University of the West
Indies . The opportunity Mr. Persaud now enjoys is largely due to the
foundation laid by Critchlow.

Those who follow Mr. Persaud's political and government growth will
accept that the he plays a very significant role in the PPP party and
government. Recall his role as President Jagdeo/Office of the President
Liaison Officer and GINA, and now Minister of Agriculture. It is also
generally felt that Mr. Persaud exercises great influence in the PYO
and PPP and media outlets affiliated/associated with the Party. It is
also felt he is being groomed for the Presidency.

Mr. Persaud should be asked what was his contribution to that Cabinet
meet-ing that took the unjust decision to withdraw taxpayers' money
from the College. He should also tell us if he agrees with the
government treatment of his Alma Mater, and, if not, what he plans to
do to reverse it.

There have been calls to hear from Mr. Komal Chand, GAWU leader, PPP
Central Executive Member and Member of Parliament. To date he has not
spoken. His opinion must be solicited and shared with the public. Both
Messrs Persaud and Komal Chand are public figures who benefited from
Critchlow, are paid by tax dollars and hold influential positions in
the PPP party and government. If anyone within the PPP hierarchy can
reverse this unjust act, it will be Robert Persaud and/or Komal Chand.
Young people and workers must hear from them.

I read the College is seeking ways to survive without the subvention
and former students are calling for a scholarship fund. Both are good
pursuits. The College needs to pursue the scholarship fund.
Additionally while it is good to have the College wean itself off the
subvention, the college should continue to pursue the issue of ensuring
the subvention is returned. After all, this is tax payers' money, now
unjustly withheld that was given to the College for many decades, to
which the students and their parents have and are contributing.

Yours faithfully,

Sonjay Thom

Gold-smuggling trio held on return to Guyana

2008-03-17T12:47:00.001-07:00

http://www.stabroeknews.com/index.pl/article?id=56541148

Gold-smuggling trio held on return to Guyana
Stabroek News, Sunday, March 16th 2008

The three men who had been held in Suriname with a large quantity of
gold were arrested on Friday on their return to Guyana and remained in
custody up to yesterday.

Meanwhile, the police are still working to determine whether there is
any link between the illegal exportation of gold to Suriname and the
incident at Bartica involving robbery under arms and murder of 12
persons.

Police in a statement yesterday said the men were being questioned in
relation to the illegal export with a view to determining whether it is
linked to the Bartica incident.

On February 17, when gunmen stormed Bartica, they had first attacked
the police station where three policemen were shot and killed. They
then went to the CB&R Mining Company where they shot and killed a
security guard and stole 12 guns, a quantity of gold and some petty
cash, which was in an iron safe. Neither CB&R Owner Chunilall Baboolall
nor the police had ever revealed to this newspaper the amount of gold
stolen.

The gunmen had also destroyed security cameras at the location.

They then proceeded to the home of gold dealer Gurudat Singh, from
where, it was reported, they escaped with a safe. A source told this
newspaper that the gunmen would have taken a large quantity of gold
from this family's home.

The gold that was taken from the men has been confiscated by the Dutch
authorities, though it is not the property of Suriname. This newspaper
understands that the men told Surinamese authorities that they had
purchased the gold in Guyana but had carried it over the border since
they got more money for the mineral there.

Suriname sources said the men were being held for some time before the
authorities decided on their course of action. They were then taken to
court where they were fined.

A well placed source had told this newspaper that the men may be a part
of a well established, gold smuggling ring supported by a network of
Chinese businessmen operating out of Suriname.

This newspaper was also reliably informed that the gold, which the
authorities intercepted, might not have been the full booty and that
more of the mineral had missed the authorities' vigilance on that day.
The source informed Stabroek News too that the smuggling of gold to
Suriname was a regular occurrence and this was possible because some
gold and diamond dealers continue to be dishonest in their declaration
of production.

"The problem is historical and they are not declaring their full
produce, so some are able to escape and they make much more money in
Suriname. It is fairly well established and is a historical problem
which lies mostly in the issue of proper declaration," the source said.

Observers as well as stakeholders in the mining industry had in the
past, raised many concerns with regard to declarations by gold and
diamond dealers and some had gone as far as saying that they were
convinced that only one third of the country's total gold production
was being declared.

"Even while we are seeing declaration increasing to some extent, this
has mostly been so because of increased production capacity. But they
are indeed producing far more gold now and we are still only seeing
less than half of what is produced," the source said.

The source who is also knowledgeable about local mining operations told
Stabroek News that for the authorities to clamp down on smuggling,
vigilance would have to be heightened at the level of mining officers
on the ground.

The source said the record keeping measures in this regard, sometimes
leave much to be desired and added that the declaration system would
have to be enhanced. As such, the source suggested that the forms which
miners are made to full out would have to be done properly and a proper
policing and vetting system implemented.

Many gold dealers have found the Suriname market for gold more
lucrative since the laws there are a bit different and more favourable
in terms of royalties and taxes.

US$26M saw milling investment set to take off next month

2008-03-17T12:45:00.000-07:00

http://www.stabroeknews.com/index.pl/article?id=56541146

US$26M saw milling investment set to take off next month
Stabroek News, Sunday, March 16th 2008

US saw milling company Simon and Shock Incor-porated (SSI) hopes to get
its US$26 million investment in Guyana started next month.

It is in the process of working out some aspects of its agreement in
the light of changes owing to problems in the industry with
land-lording of small concessionaires.

Speaking to this newspaper on Tuesday, CEO Kelly Simon said that with
the new measures in place to prevent land-lording by companies on other
concessions, the newly tailored arrangements for the use of equipment
in these concessions were in their end stages.

He said that the company proposes to lease its equipment to the
concession holders and train them in the safe and proper use of the
equipment, which he described as brand new.

According to Simon, someone on the government side asked whether the
company was willing to give the equipment to the concessionaires, to
which he said no way, since his investors wouldn't allow US$4 million
in equipment to be handed over just like that.

After months of due diligence and some tension between the company and
the Guyana Office for Invest-ment (Go-Invest) last year, government
through the Guyana Forestry Commis-sion (GFC) granted a State Forest
Exploratory Permit to SSI about two and a half months ago.

The company has been awarded concessions totalling 391,892 hectares in
Regions Six and Nine and expects total employment to exceed 112 with at
least 85 per cent local hire, ranging from senior management to
starting positions.

The company plans to invest over US$26 million in three years.

The technology that the company hopes to introduce to Guyana is said to
have impressed government, which has been chirruping its desire lately
to bring sustainable forestry, high recovery rates, and value adding
investment to the industry. This followed President Bharrat Jagdeo's
offer of Guyana's forests to the world to combat the effects of climate
change.

The company is also working out with the government, the exact location
for the sawmilling plant to be constructed at Linden.

While on the phone with this reporter, Simon was also speaking to the
company's lawyers on the paperwork to be drawn up for the commencement
of the investment. He said that another company executive would be in
Guyana during next week to further the arrangements with the
government.

Simon said SSI hoped to achieve recovery rates upwards of 70 per cent,
twice as much as is being achieved in Guyana today.

The company is building from the ground up, a brand new, modern
sawmill, which, with the aid of computer imagery, will be able to scan
a log and calculate the number of boards that it would yield.

In this way, the little waste it produces would be used to power its
kiln-drying plant. The company would be buying about half of its logs
from other concessions.

As a direct result of the talks with the government, the company
offered three written guarantees. Firstly, that SSI would not export
logs from Guyana, since it was a lumber company and not a logging
company; secondly, that SSI would build an advanced milling complex in
Linden before any logging activity took place; and thirdly, that if SSI
did not build the advanced mill in Linden in a specific time period,
all logging concessions granted to SSI by the government would be
returned uncut.

Seminar puts focus on bolstering forestry research - network to be set up for Guyana and other ACP countries

2008-03-14T09:52:00.001-07:00

Guyana Chronicle news article, Thursday 13 March 2008

http://www.guyanachronicle.com/news.html
Seminar puts focus on bolstering forestry research
- network to be set up for Guyana and other ACP countries

By Tajeram Mohabir

IWOKRAMA International Rainforest Centre, in collaboration with Guyana
Forestry Commission (GFC), yesterday conducted a one-day seminar to
strengthen forest research priorities in the Guianas.
It was attended by representatives of several key stakeholders in the sector
and convened at Red House, High Street, Kingston, Georgetown.
Iwokrama Chief Executive Officer (CEO), Mr. Dane Gobin, said it was part of
a seven million euros project to establish a researching network for
African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries, as well.
He said the programme seeks to bolster the networking to facilitate transfer
of results between applied research initiatives, which will contribute to
the building of effective tools to monitor sustainable development.
It would also test the criteria and indicators of sustainable forest
management under different socio-economic and ecological conditions, Gobin
disclosed.
The ACP states involved are The Cameroons, Central African Republic,
Democratic Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Guyana, Suriname,
Fiji, Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands and Vanuatu.
Gobin said the network stations and tropical research teams will contribute
to the extension of training for EU and ACP graduate and post graduate
students.
He explained that yesterday's workshop will facilitate inter-regional
collaboration between ACP forest research organisations, by strengthening
capacities of selected structures to effectively promote and implement
common themes.
Other expected results are:

* strengthening the capacities of selected ACP forestry research structures
to document biodiversity in support of sustainable use of forest goods and
services;

* creation of appropriate training opportunities and

* improvement of capacities for inter-regional and international
collaboration with ACP and European forestry research institutions,
networking and information dissemination.

Minister of Agriculture, Mr. Robert Persaud, said the aim was, essentially,
to update the work of a National Workshop on Forestry Research held in
September 1999, by prioritising areas for forestry research.
In addition to the areas previously identified at that 1999 workshop, I
challenge you to take on board all recent developments that are occurring
locally and internationally in the sphere of forestry and other renewable
natural resources," he told the participants.
Persaud said new tropical areas present Guyana with golden opportunities to
expand on the types of services and products the local forests offer,
especially globally, when much more recognition and emphasis are
increasingly placed on the role of forests in mitigating climate change and
as a source of renewable energy.
He expressed optimism that the research priorities will, in the long run,
reinforce Guyana's call to the international community for a market-based
compensatory mechanism to reward standing rainforests for environmental
services.
The minister, whose portfolio encompasses forestry, appealed to the various
stakeholders to work together as a team and respect the roles in which they
operate.
is the only way we would be able to synergise our varied talents to maximise
our outputs and take the forestry sector forward in a constructive and
positive manner," he stated.
The GFC is tasked with the responsibility of managing the nation's State
forestry resources which total some 13.6 million hectares of tropical
rainforest and some of what is responsible for includes allocation,
harvesting, extraction, industry development and processing, marketing and
research.
However, its regulatory and revenue collection activities take priority over
research, in which University of Guyana (UG), Conservation
International(CI), Worldwide Fund for Nature (WFN) and Tropenbos-Guyana are
all partners.

Minister Rodrigues urges early appointment of Indigenous People's Commission

2008-03-14T09:51:00.000-07:00

Guyana Chronicle news article, Thursday 13 March 2008
http://www.guyanachronicle.com/news.html
Minister Rodrigues urges early appointment of Indigenous People's Commission

MINISTER of Amerindian Affairs, Ms. Carolyn Rodrigues, has urged that the
Appointive Committee of Parliament conclude its consideration of the
Indigenous People's Commission (IPC) as soon as possible.
Making a presentation in the National Assembly during the 2008 Budget debate
recently, Minister Rodrigues said that for every day the House failed to
appoint this and other Commissions; the people of Guyana will be short
changed.
On October 24, during a National Toshaos' Conference at the Guyana
International Conference Centre, Liliendaal, three members were elected to
the IPC. Ms. Yvonne Pearson, Toshao of Mainstay/Whyaka is the first woman
elected, while the other two members are opposition member of Parliament Dr.
George Norton of Riverview village, Region 10 and Mr. William Andries of
Toka Village, Region 9.
Minister Rodrigues said, "Let us put aside our differences and demonstrate
our confidence in our Guyanese people, regardless of where they are from and
what they look like, by appointing some of them to these Commissions."
The IPC will address all aspects of Amerindian rights and development and
will be accountable for the interest of all indigenous people.
Twenty members were unanimously elected by their fellow Toshaos from various
sub-regions within the ten administrative Regions to form the National
Toshaos Council (NTC) out of which the IPC evolved.
These Toshaos are mandated with the responsibility of protecting the
interest of Amerindians in the country and will give support to the IPC.
The council will make decisions in accordance with the new Amerindian Act
for the benefit of all Amerindians.
This is a very important body that has long been called for and the
Government looks forward to working in a collaborative manner with the NTC,
Minister Rodrigues said.
Government was highly praised by the NTC for making the long-awaited Council
a reality and for continuing the development of Amerindians. (GINA).

Gold smugglers busted in Suriname?

2008-03-14T09:49:00.000-07:00

http://www.stabroeknews.com/index.pl/article?id=56540959

Gold smugglers busted in Suriname?
Stabroek News, Thursday, March 13th 2008

The three Guyanese men who were intercepted with a large amount of gold
in Suriname may be part of a well-established, gold smuggling ring,
supported by a network of Chinese businessmen operating out of
Suriname. The trio was reportedly travelling in a locally registered
car.

However there is still a question as to whether there is any link
between this find and the robbery of a gold dealer at Bartica on the
night gunmen waged war in the community and took 12 lives.

A police source told Stabroek News yesterday that the police here have
been provided with the names of the men who were apprehended and are to
be informed as to what action will be taken against them. The source
said the incident could be dealt with as a customs matter and the
persons made to pay the necessary fines in that regard.

Another well-placed source told Stabroek News that there were
suspicions that persons here with close links to mining camps would
purchase gold illegally, accumulate it and then smuggle large amounts
of it to neighbouring Suriname where the laws were a bit different and
more favourable in terms of royalties and taxes, which would have to be
paid. In Guyana, miners are subject to royalties of five per cent and a
tax of two per cent and so selling gold here was not as lucrative.

"So the police there may have caught up with some from that chain of
smugglers," the source said. "But whether the gold they had may have
come from the Bartica robbery is still to be determined."

On February 17 when gunmen stormed Bartica, they had first attacked the
police station where three policemen were shot and killed. They then
went to the CB&R Mining Company where they shot and killed a security
guard and stole 12 guns, a quantity of gold and some petty cash, which
was in an iron safe. Neither CB&R Owner Chunilall Baboolall nor the
police had ever revealed to this newspaper the amount of gold stolen.

The gunmen had also destroyed security cameras at the location.

They then proceeded to the home of gold dealer Gurudat Singh, from
where, it was reported, they escaped with a safe. The source told this
newspaper that the gunmen would have taken a large quantity of gold
from this family's home.

The source explained that many gold dealers have been taking advantage
of the Guyana Gold Board having opened an office in Bartica and were
selling their gold to avoid the security risk of holding it at their
homes or offices.

Many have concluded that the real intention of the February 17 massacre
at Bartica might have been robbery and if the gold found in the
possession of the trio in Suriname came from the Bartica robberies,
then the theories of community members' participation would add up.

On that night, after attacking the community's arm of law enforcement
and crippling any element of protection, the gunmen shot and injured
innocent persons, supplemented their weaponry, and then executed six
men who were on boats docked at the Transport and Harbours stelling.

Killed in the Bartica attack were residents Edwin Gilkes, Dexter Adrian
and Irving Ferreira; policemen stationed at the Bartica Police Station,
Lance Corporal Zaheer Zakir, and Constables Shane Fredericks and Ron
Osborne, and Deonarine Singh of Wakenaam; Ronald Gomes of Kuru Kururu;
Ashraf Khan of Middlesex, Essequibo; Abdool Yasin; Errol Thomas of
Tuschen, East Bank Essequibo and Baldeo Singh of Montrose, East Coast
Demerara, who were shot execution style at the stelling.

The gunmen were dressed in military type clothing and in bulletproof
vests and armed with rapid-fire guns. They numbered around 20,
residents estimated. The police said some of the gunmen were dressed in
foreign camouflage and khaki clothing and some residents said they also
appeared to be wearing helmets. After the incident the police said that
165 spent shells of 7.62 x 39 calibre, eight 7.62 x 51 spent shells,
three .32 spent shells along with eleven 7.62 x 39 and fifteen .32 live
rounds were recovered.

The joint services have since recovered a gun stolen from the CB&R
Mining Company. Law enforcement officials said they unearthed an
abandoned camp at Bucktown, Wismar, which had been the likely hideout
of the men. Searches at the camp produced a Guyana passport and NIS
card in the name of Baboolall along with a quantity of eating utensils,
a searchlight, a green tarpaulin, a hacksaw blade, and an empty plastic
water container among other articles.

Aid to Amerindian communities for development not handouts -Rodrigues

2008-03-07T05:35:00.001-08:00

http://www.stabroeknews.com/index.pl/article?id=56540473

Aid to Amerindian communities for development not handouts -Rodrigues
By Miranda La Rose
Stabroek News, Thursday, March 6th 2008

Minister of Amerindian Affairs Carolyn Rodrigues has chided the
opposition for referring to government's assistance in the form of
transportation, machinery and equipment to Amerindian communities as
handouts, declaring that they are much needed items for the development
process.

As one of the four speakers on the budget in the National Assembly
during the first three hours yesterday, Rodrigues took to task PNCR-1G
MPs Dr George Norton and Anthony Vieira for referring to the much
"needed items" as handouts when given by the government but not
classified in the same manner when the PNCR does likewise.

"Stop that and stop that today," she told the opposition MPs in the
parliament chambers while students from the Bina Hill Institute of
Annai, North Rupununi and a number of other hinterland students looked
on from the gallery.

Speaking about the welfare of hinterland students, she said that the
government would be building a students' hostel in the city to
accommodate hinterland students in keeping with requests from parents
and the students themselves. At present she said there are 150 students
who are staying at various homes across the city.

This plan, AFC MP Raphael Trotman told the National Assembly in his
presentation, is commendable but it is not meeting the needs of the
Amerindian communities which are in dire need of improvement.

Rodrigues noted that the educational needs of Amerindian students were
being met in many of the hinterland communities by secondary schools
which the PPP/C government has built. In addition, she said, most of
the students coming from the hinterland to attend the residential
President's College were performing very well.

Also in terms of educational inputs, she said that in recent years
1,000 teachers were trained in the hinterland and 70 teacher trainees
were currently at the Cyril Potter College of Education and another 200
were being trained in the region.

Noting that Dr Norton had raised the issue of awarding scholarships to
Amerindian students who perform excellently in sports, Rodrigues noted
that there was no precedent but she had discussed this issue with
Minister of Culture, Youth and Sport Dr Frank Anthony and reported that
it was an idea that could be further explored.

Casareep

Her remarks on the removal of Value Added Tax (VAT) on cassava bread,
farine and casareep (all cassava products) brought laughter to the
house.

Reporting on issues related to the Amerindian communities, she said
that 75 per cent of the 96 titled communities are now demarcated.
Moreover, titled communal ownership by most Amerindian communities was
an achievement Guyanese in general should be proud of since many
indigenous groups in other parts of the world move to the courts to
challenge their governments on land rights issues.

Referring to improved telecommunication in the far-flung regions, she
congratulated the Guyana Telephone and Telegraph company and Digicel
for making this possible, while expressing confidence that they would
continue to extend their service to all parts of the country.

Rodrigues was loud in her praise for the success of the malaria
eradication programme in the hinterland.

She said that she expects the number to be greatly reduced this year
owing to the Ministry of Health's vector control programme which has
distributed impregnated mosquito nets to hinterland communities.

In terms of vector control, Minister of Health Dr Leslie Ramsammy
announced to the house that the ministry has taken on to its
establishment a 'health emergency coordinator' to work in the area of
vector control. It was the first time that the ministry was employing
someone in this position who will be dealing with vector control to
include control of rodents, he said.

Dr Ramsammy noted that vector control would no longer be part of the
disease control mechanism but it would be placed in environmental
health.

Supporting the budget which he boasted provides the social sector with
the largest allocation, he said his ministry has also received its
largest allocation ever in the sum of $12.1 billion.

Stating that "we must never defer the social needs of our people," he
said "the PPP budgets have always had that hallmark" of catering to the
social needs.

In spite of the allocation, he noted that it was not sufficient and
even the developed USA has some 37 million people who do not have
access to basic health care. He noted that even though there was
improved health care in Guyana there were a number of areas that needed
attention such as treating with kidney failure and making open heart
surgery accessible.

And contending that "Health insurance was not going to work in Guyana,"
he invited the opposition MPs to work with the government on finding
solutions to the problem areas in health which need to be tackled.

Equal participation, not dictatorship, for strategy on forest industry

2008-03-07T05:34:00.000-08:00

Equal participation, not dictatorship, for strategy on forest industry
Kaieteur News, 6 March 2008

Dear Editor,
I would like to thank Ms Samantha Griffith for informing us that
“Article 8 B (Export Tax) of the agreement signed between the Guyana
Government and Barama on 14th August 1991” requires that company to pay
the export commission on greenheart logs only (“The Forestry
Commission’s critics are now criticising it for enforcing standards”,
SN: February 23, 2008).
I pointed out in my public lecture that Barama owed this tax but was
contesting payment on logs harvested from illegally rented concessions
(“Country getting a pittance from Asian forestry companies – Bulkan –
monitoring agency ‘weak’”, SN: November 13, 2006).
The GFC has not publicly stated that Barama has paid this
long-outstanding debt, nor its other debts and penalties (“Barama still
to pay second fine – Minister Persaud”, KN: January 19, 2008; “Loggers
to pay $275M fines for forestry breaches”, SN: January 20, 2008).

Ms Griffith evidently has privileged access to secret Foreign Direct
Investment (FDI) agreements. The new Section 13 (2) of the Guyana
Forestry Commission Act passed by the National Assembly in July 2007
sets out what is essentially a gag order on any GFC “member, employee,
consultant, or adviser,” unless authorised by the Commission. Section
27 of that Act sets out severe penalties for the disclosure of any
information, so that any person convicted and found guilty under this
Act is liable to up to 10 times the statutory fine set at one year’s
imprisonment and G$1,000,000 (US$5,000). It is not clear if this Act
has received Presidential assent, but let us assume that it has.

The Commissioner of Forests himself recently stated that “as the
regulatory agency for forestry in Guyana, the GFC is duty bound to let
stakeholders be aware of what the real issues are…” (“Timber producers
were advised well in advance of the requirements for approval”, SN:
February 13, 2008). So Ms Griffith appears to be authorised to write
on behalf of the Commission. Mr. Editor, as she is able to disclose
one article in the Barama FDI, could Ms Griffith publicise the entire
text of the Barama agreement, including all amendments since 1991, and
the FDI arrangements for Bai Shan Lin, Jailing and other Asian-owned
loggers?

This would be one way for the GFC to demonstrate transparency. As the
Commissioner chairs a standing committee of the International Tropical
Timber Organisation (ITTO), he will be familiar with the exhortation
about trade transparency in the ITTO annual review and assessment of
the world timber situation 2006, including “It is only through the free
flow of reliable information on forests and trade that governments and
industry can evaluate their resources, set development goals and take
appropriate action to grow the trade, capture more of its value, and
discourage illegal activities”
(http://www.itto.or.jp/live/PageDisplayHandler?pageId=91&id=561).

Ms Griffith did not dispute the estimate that Guyana is losing at least
US$50 million a year from improper Customs declarations of FOB values
of prime hardwood logs to India and China (which together take 95
percent of all logs exported). Declared log export volumes declined in
2007 compared with 2006, but so did sawn timber exports. Ms Griffith
referred to “the logs that Bulkan wants banned”. Log exports are
nowhere endorsed in national policies. On the contrary, national
policies from the National Development Strategy onwards encourage
on-shore processing and value addition. Indeed, the PPP election
manifesto of 2006 mentioned value addition in the timber industry four
times on one page. My letter noted that “350 stakeholders at the
public consultation on a log export policy convened by the Guyana
Forestry Commission (GFC) endorsed overwhelmingly the replacement of
log exports by local timber processing.” And I have never suggested a
ban, only an appropriate tax or levy which shifts the financial
incentive from log exports to local processing, as advised to the GFC
and Forest Products Association by reviewers since at least 1994.

So who opposes national timber processing and the export of value-added
wood products? Those who are involved in the export of raw logs to
Asia. And who are those exporters? Mostly the Asian-owned companies
which receive FDI tax incentives from our Government for on-shore
processing, increased local employment and skills enhancement. And
what is the response of such companies? “Barama plywood mill to shut
temporarily over supply”, SN: December 5, 2007. Barama closes or
threatens to close the plywood mill, which it runs at 25 per cent
capacity, if it is not allowed to continue logging in illegally rented
concessions for our fine timbers, which it and its associated companies
export as logs for manufacture in flooring and furniture factories in
Asia.

At his press conference on December 8th, 2006, Minister Robert Persaud
referred to non-compliance by Barama and Jailing with their FDI
agreements and provided some details of the 12-month plans proposed by
those Asian loggers to achieve compliance. Through your columns, Mr
Editor, perhaps Ms Griffith, or the Commissioner of Forests, or
Minister
Persaud will provide status reports on the performance of these and
other FDI-benefiting companies?

Concerning technical standards for sawmills and lumber yards, the GFC
was quite right to show pictures during presentations in 2007
contrasting poor standards of timber handling in Guyana with those of a
mill or mills in Belém, Brazil. What does not make sense is to impose
requirements which are unrelated to specific market demands and which
lack implementable legislative backing, as has been mentioned
previously in SN. Writers with direct involvement in product
processing have commented on the inappropriate GFC approach (“The
punitive requirements imposed by the Forestry Commission on timber
producers have severely affected them”, SN: February 9, 2008; “The
Guyana Forestry Commission is crippling the forestry sector” KN:
January 26, 2008).

The repetitive responses from the GFC do not deal with the substance of
the complaints: that the GFC lacks the business experience to tell the
industry how to improve, and I would add that it lacks the legal
mandate to do so. It would make more sense for the GFC to develop in a
participatory, non-dictatorial manner a coherent strategy for industry
improvement, taking account of recommendations reiterated in, for
example, the ITTO diagnostic survey of 2002, which had been requested
by the Government.

At a public talk in Guyana in 2006, a visiting anti-corruption expert
put forward a formula for corruption:- C=M+D -T — (Corruption is
facilitated by Monopoly plus Discretion minus Transparency), (“World
body ranks Guyana poorly on corruption - says anti-corruption expert”,
KN: July 14, 2006). Legislators, recently gathered in Brazil from the
Group of Eight (G8) richest economies and five key developing
countries, have called for countries to pass domestic legislation that
would make it a criminal offence to buy illegally logged timber. Both
houses of the US Congress are working in a bi-partisan effort to amend
the Lacey Act so that penalties now applied to traders in illegally
obtained wildlife would be extended to trees and plants harvested in
other countries. ITTO has issued a similar call.

Guyana needs to take serious note of these developments. Instead of
penalizing its forest workers and small processors, our regulatory
agencies need to focus on those nodes of the supply chain where the
forest wealth of Guyana is haemorrhaging while FDI-benefiting companies
remain in non-compliance with their agreements.

As the GFC continues to demonstrate both disregard for local
stakeholders and incompetence in supervising forest harvesting, I urge
readers through you, Mr. Editor, to add their signatures to a
submission on the Forests Bill 2007. This submission to the Special
Select Committee of the National Assembly is open for signature during
working hours at the Jesuit Presbytery, Camp Street and Brickdam. The
submission must be transmitted to the Parliament Office before 7th
March 2008.
Janette Bulkan

'STOP IT!' - Rodrigues slams opposition, calls for end to stigma against Amerindians

2008-03-07T05:33:00.002-08:00

http://www.guyanachronicle.com/topstory.html

Guyana Chronicle top story, Thursday March 6th 2008 -

'STOP IT!'
- Rodrigues slams opposition, calls for end to stigma against Amerindians
By Neil Marks
AMERINDIAN Affairs Minister, Ms Carolyn Rodrigues, yesterday slammed
opposition Parliamentarians for referring to state provisions to Amerindian
communities as "handouts", saying such utterances further drives the stigma
attached to Amerindian people.
'We must stop that and stop it today!" Rodrigues declared during her
presentation to the National Assembly in defence of the 2008 national
budget. Witnessing the debate was a large group of hinterland students on a
city tour.
"Why do we refer to it as handouts when we give to Amerindian communities,
and when we give to other communities it is not called handouts?" she
charged.
She further knocked the opposition for suggesting that the Amerindian people
live in oppression. "Freedom is what we know...freedom is when we can send
our children to school," she stated.
Rodrigues, an Amerindian herself, was sharp on her heels as she picked apart
the arguments of the main opposition People's National Congress Reform
(PNCR) - from a bridge crossing and a student's hostel to cassava bread and
outboard engines.
However, it was the claim by PNCR Member of Parliament (MP), Ms Volda
Lawrence that cutting the 16 per cent Value Added Tax (VAT) on cassava
bread, farine, and casareep, would not significantly affect the life of
Guyanese that Rodrigues said "hurt the most."
She said these items are primarily associated with Amerindians, and by
cutting VAT on these items, the government was looking to create economic
opportunities for Amerindians.
She displayed a brochure of North West Organics, an organisation of
Amerindians producing organic products for sale. She said the products of
North West Organics, such as casareep, are being sold on supermarket
shelves.
&#xI hope it was an innocent mistake," she said of Lawrence's suggestion,
and at this juncture, the Speaker, Mr. Ralph Ramkarran, had to ask the House
to "cool it, cool it", as members on both sides of the benches slew remarks
at each other.
Rodrigues' other arguments were sharp as she picked up specific claims by
the opposition.
She first snapped at speculation that the bridging of the Echilebar river,
which separates Regions Eight and Nine, has not yet commenced, when in fact,
the project contract was awarded last December at a cost of $10M.
The Amerindian Affairs minister also called a list of contractors from
hinterland regions, putting to rest claims that hinterland projects are
often outsourced to contractors from outside the region.
She did admit that transportation problems have forever plagued the
hinterland regions, but said the government was moving ahead with its aim to
ease the transportation woes of hinterland residents.
She said five more All Terrain Vehicles (ATVs) will be given to the
mountainous Potaro/Siparuni region this year, adding to the five which were
given earlier this year.
Rodrigues also announced plans to acquire two boats to help communities in
the Berbice river get their produce out to New Amsterdam, as the smaller
boats cannot do the job.
Several other communities will receive boat and engines - the sort of items
the opposition called "handouts."
Turning to another PNCR Member of Parliament, the minister lashed out at Mr.
Anthony Veira for suggesting that the government bunk the project to build
the $50M students' hostel in Georgetown to accommodate hinterland students
on scholarships at city schools.
She said the building would accommodate all the students together and help
the Ministry of Amerindian Affairs to institute additional classes for them,
since this is not now possible given that the students have to be housed at
various locations.
Referring to questions about how many of the students from the hinterland
are attending Bishop's High School and other top schools, Rodrigues posited
that many of them were in fact at President's College and doing well.
Further flooring the arguments of the opposition, she said many parents in
the hinterland have chosen not to send their children to the city but have
chosen to send them to schools built in the hinterland.
Rodrigues said her Ministry has had discussions with the Ministry of
Culture, Youth and Sport to extend scholarships to those who excel in
sports, "if their parents want to send them."
She noted, too, that some 7, 111 hinterland children benefitted from the
government's uniform programme last year, while the school feeding programme
has seen an improvement in school attendance.
Also, she noted that 70 teachers from regions One, Seven, eight and Nine are
currently studying at the teacher's training centre at Turkeyen, East Coast
Demerara, while a further 200 are being trained in the various regions
through a distance programme.
Minister Rodrigues then went on to trump up the achievements of the
government in providing titles to the lands that Amerindians have for ages
lived on and off of.
In 2007, she said eight Amerindian communities received "absolute" grants to
their land, and with the 24 issued in the last three years, the total amount
of communities to receive such grants now amounts to 96.
Nine other communities have made claims to have their grants, she added,
noting that the budget has allocated $40M to continue the demarcation
programme.
She said around the world, indigenous land claims has been a thorny issue,
and while Guyana does not claim to have the prescription to settle land
claims, she said other countries can certainly learn a few lessons.

Booklet on new Amerindian Act to be more user-friendly

2008-03-07T05:33:00.001-08:00

Booklet on new Amerindian Act to be more user-friendly
Guyana Chronicle, 5 March 2008
THE Ministry of Amerindian Affairs is currently working on producing
booklets on the new Amerindian Act in languages that will be understood
by the Amerindians.

Minister of Amerindian Affairs, Carolyn Rodrigues, said the legal
language is posing some difficulties and the Ministry wants to make the
document more user-friendly in order that its contents are easily
understood

It was noted that there are booklets on the Amerindian Act already
which are available to the public; however, Amerindian communities
specifically will be targeted for the distribution of these new
booklets.

Minister Rodrigues said that the project which started last year is
almost complete.

Additionally, templates of the forestry and mining sectors are in the
printing process which will serve as a guide for communities that are
involved in the two sectors.

The Minister said the project will be pursued because of several
complaints received by the Ministry, many of which relate to agreements
not properly formulated, resulting in communities losing out.

She said a workshop was completed with the communities’ Toshaos in
order that they understand and are knowledgeable of the contents of the
Act.

This will guide the people to read and understand the rules better.

In the long-term not only this, but future generations as well will
benefit, Minister Rodrigues said.

The Amerindian Act of 1951 was outdated and not reflective of today’s
situation and many communities had asked for it to be revised.

In early August 2005, the Amerindian Bill was presented to Parliament
and was subsequently debated on October 20, 2005.

The new Amerindian Act was passed on February 16, 2006 paving the way
for Amerindians to empower themselves socially, economically and
politically. (GINA)

Our forest wealth continues to haemorrhage while companies remain in non-compliance with their agreements

2008-03-07T05:32:00.000-08:00

http://www.stabroeknews.com/index.pl/article?id=56540417

Our forest wealth continues to haemorrhage while companies remain in
non-compliance with their agreements
Stabroek News, Wednesday, March 5th 2008

Dear Editor,

I'd like to thank Ms Samantha Griffith for informing us that "Article 8
B (Export tax) of the agreement signed between the Guyana Government
and Barama on 14th August 1991" requires that company to pay the export
commission on greenheart logs only ("The forestry commission's critics
are now criticizing it for enforcing standards", SN February 23 2008).
I pointed out in my public lecture that Barama was owing this tax but
was contesting payment on logs harvested from illegally rented
concessions ("Country getting a pittance from Asian forestry companies
- Bulkan - monitoring agency 'weak'", SN November 13 2006). The GFC has
not publicly stated that Barama has paid this long-outstanding debt,
nor its other debts and penalties ("Barama still to pay second fine -
Minister Persaud", KN January 19 2008; "Loggers to pay $275M fines for
forestry breaches", SN January 20 2008).

Ms Griffith evidently has privileged access to secret Foreign Direct
Investment (FDI) agreements. The new Section 13 (2) of the Guyana
Forestry Commission Act passed by the National Assembly in July 2007
sets out what is essentially a gag order on any GFC "member, employee,
consultant, or adviser," unless authorized by the Commission. Section
27 of that Act sets out severe penalties for the disclosure of any
information, so that any person convicted and found guilty under this
Act is liable to up to 10 times the statutory fine set at 1 year's
imprisonment and G$1,000,000 (US$5,000). It is not clear if this Act
has received Presidential assent, but let us assume that it has.

The Commissioner of Forests himself recently stated that "as the
regulatory agency for forestry in Guyana, the GFC is duty bound to let
stakeholders be aware of what the real issues areâ€¦" ("Timber
producers were advis-ed well in advance of the requirements for
approval", SN February 13 2008). So Ms Griffith appears to be
authorized to write on behalf of the Commission. Mr Editor, as she is
able to disclose one article in the Barama FDI, could Ms Griffith
publicise the entire text of the Barama agreement, including all
amendments since 1991? And the FDI arrangements for Bai Shan Lin,
Jailing and other Asian-owned loggers?

This would be one way for the GFC to demonstrate transparency. As the
Commis-sioner chairs a standing committee of the Inter-national
Tropical Timber Organization (ITTO) he will be familiar with the
exhortation about trade transparency in the ITTO annual review and
assessment of the world timber situation 2006, including "It is only
through the free flow of reliable information on forests and trade that
governments and industry can evaluate their resources, set development
goals and take appropriate action to grow the trade, capture more of
its value, and discourage illegal activities"
(http://www.itto.or.jp/live/Page DisplayHandler?pageId=91&id

=561).

Ms Griffith did not dispute the estimate that Guyana is losing at least
US$50 million a year from improper Customs declarations of FOB values
of prime hardwood logs to India and China (which together take 95
percent of all logs exported). Declared log export volumes declined in
2007 compared with 2006 but so did sawn timber exports. Ms Griffith
referred to "the logs that Bulkan wants banned". Log exports are
nowhere endorsed in national policies. On the contrary, national
policies from the National Development Strategy onwards encourage
on-shore processing and value addition. Indeed, the PPP election
manifesto of 2006 mentioned value addition in the timber industry four
times on one page. My letter noted that "350 stakeholders at the public
consultation on a log export policy convened by the Guyana Forestry
Commission (GFC) endorsed overwhelmingly the replacement of log exports
by local timber processing". And I have never suggested a ban, only an
appropriate tax or levy which shifts the financial incentive from log
exports to local processing, as advised to the GFC and Forest Products
Association by reviewers since at least 1994.

So who opposes national timber processing and the export of value-added
wood products?

Those who are involved in the export of raw logs to Asia. And who are
those exporters?

Mostly the Asian-owned companies which receive FDI tax incentives from
our Govern-ment for on-shore processing, increased local employment and
skills enhancement. And what is the response of such companies? -
"Barama plywood mill to shut temporarily over supply", SN December 5
2007. Barama closes or threatens to close the plywood mill which it
runs at 25 per cent capacity if it is not allowed to continue logging
in illegally rented concessions for our fine timbers which it and its
associated companies export as logs for manufacture in flooring and
furniture factories in Asia.

At his press conference on December 8 2006, Minister Robert Persaud
referred to non-compliance by Barama and Jailing with their FDI
agreements and provided some details of the 12-month plans proposed by
those Asian loggers to achieve compliance. Through your columns, Mr
Editor, perhaps Ms Griffith or the Commissioner of Forests or Minister
Persaud will provide status reports on the performance of these and
other FDI-benefiting companies?

Concerning technical standards for saw-mills and lumber yards, the GFC
was quite right to show pictures during presentations in 2007
contrasting poor standards of timber handling in Guyana with those of a
mill or mills in BelÃ©m, Brazil. What does not make sense is to impose
requirements which are unrelated to specific market demands and which
lack implementable legislative backing; as has been mentioned
previously in SN. Writers with direct involvement in product processing
have commented on the inappropriate GFC approach ("The punitive
requirements impos-ed by the Forestry commission on timber producers
have severely affected them", SN February 9 2008; "The Guyana Forestry
Com-mission is crippling the forestry sector" KN January 26 2008). The
repetitive responses from the GFC do not deal with the substance of the
complaints: that the GFC lacks the business experience to tell the
industry how to improve, and I would add that it lacks the legal
mandate to do so.

It would make more sense for the GFC to develop in a participatory
non-dictatorial manner a coherent strategy for industry improvement,
taking account of recommendations reiterated in, for example, the ITTO
diagnostic survey of 2002; which had been requested by the Government.

At a public talk in Guyana in 2006, a visiting anti-corruption expert
put forward a formula for corruption - C=M+D-T - (Corrup-tion is
facilitated by Monopoly plus Discretion minus Transparency), ("World
body ranks Guyana poorly on corruption - says anti-corruption expert",
KN July 14 2006). Legislators recently gathered in Brazil from the
Group of Eight (G8) richest economies and five key developing countries
have called for countries to pass domestic legislation that would make
it a criminal offence to buy illegally logged timber. Both houses of
the US Congress are working in a bi-partisan effort to amend the Lacey
Act, so that penalties now applied to traders in illegally obtained
wildlife would be extended to trees and plants harvested in other
countries. ITTO has issued a similar call.

Guyana needs to take serious note of these developments. Instead of
penalizing its forest workers and small processors, our regulatory
agencies need to focus on those nodes of the supply chain where the
forest wealth of Guyana is haemorrhaging, while FDI-benefiting
companies remain in non-compliance with their agreement.

As the GFC continues to demonstrate both disregard for local
stakeholders and incompetence in supervising forest harvesting, I urge
readers through you, Mr Editor, to add their signatures to a submission
on the Forests Bill 2007. This submission to the Special Select
Committee of the National Assembly is open for signature during working
hours at the Jesuit Presbytery, Camp Street and Brickdam. The
submission must be transmitted to the Parliament Office before 7 March
2008.

Yours faithfully,

Janette Bulkan

User friendly booklets on new Amerindian Act almost ready

2008-03-07T05:26:00.000-08:00

http://www.stabroeknews.com/index.pl/article?id=56540378

User friendly booklets on new Amerindian Act almost ready
Stabroek News, Wednesday, March 5th 2008

Special booklets on the new Amerindian Act which are being produced by
the Ministry of Amerindian Affairs in languages that will be understood
by the Amerin-dians are almost complete, the Government Information
Agency (GINA) reported.

GINA quoted Minister of Amerindian Affairs Carolyn Rodrigues as saying
that the legal language had been posing some difficulties and the
ministry decided to make the document more user-friendly in order that
its contents are easily understood.

There are booklets on the Amerindian Act already which are available to
the public but Amerindian communities specifically will be targeted for
the distribution of these new booklets.

Rodrigues said that the project which started last year is almost
complete. `

Additionally, templates of the forestry and mining sectors are in the
printing process which will serve as a guide for communities involved
in the two sectors.

The minister said the project will be pursued because of several
complaints relating to agreements not being properly formulated and the
communities losing out.

She said a workshop was completed with the toshaos in order that they
understand the contents of the Act, so they could better guide others.

The Amerindian Act of 1951 was outdated and not reflective of today's
situation and many communities had asked for it to be revised.

In early August 2005, the Amerindian Bill was presented to Parliament
and was subsequently debated on October 20, 2005.

The new Amerindian Act was passed on February 16, 2006 paving the way
for Amerindians to empower themselves socially, economically and
politically, GINA added.

OAS meeting in Washington… Agri Minister to speak on forestry’s role in renewable energy

2008-03-04T09:40:00.000-08:00

OAS meeting in Washington… Agri Minister to speak on forestry’s role in
renewable energy
Kaieteur News, 4 March 2008

Guyana’s Minister of Agriculture, Robert Persaud, is in Washington and
all set to address several high level ministers on renewable energy.
According to the Ministry of Agriculture, Persaud will be attending
two important ministerial forum convened by the Organization of
American States (OAS) and the United States Government in Washington,
DC, USA which among other things will be looking at hemispheric issues
concerning renewable energy sources, including bio-fuels/agro-energy.
Yesterday, an Inter-American Meeting of National Authorities and
Experts on Energy for Sustainable Development in the Americas was
scheduled to be held while from today until Friday there will be the
United States government forum – the Washington International Energy
Conference (WIREC).
The Minister will be speaking to the panel of the Ministerial Level
Concurrent Session on the theme, “The Role of Forestry in Renewable
Energy”.
Presentations will also be made by Ed Schafer, Secretary of
Agriculture, US Department of Agriculture; Kirk Kempthorne, Secretary
of the Interior of the United States; Pranab Kumar Murkherjee, Minister
of External Affairs, Republic of India; Samuel Bodman, Secretary of
Energy, US Department of Energy; John Negroponte, Deputy Secretary of
State, US Department of State and Paula Dobbriansky, Under Secretary of
State for Democracy and Global Affairs, Department of State of the US,
among others.
The OAS meeting follows the 37th regular session of the OAS General
Assembly, held in June 2007 in Pamama, where the Declaration of Panama,
“Energy for Sustainable Development”, was adopted. This document
requested that the Permanent Council and the Inter-American Council for
Integral Development (CIDI), with the Support of a Joint Working Group
of both councils, convene an Inter-American meeting of national
authorities and experts.
It is expected at the WIREC session that technology, policy,
cooperation, infrastructure, and changes and implications for
conventional forest products industry will also be presented from broad
perspectives.

Opposition parties bemoan lack of transparency in Kingston hotel project

2008-03-03T10:14:00.001-08:00

http://www.stabroeknews.com/index.pl/article?id=56540220

Opposition parties bemoan lack of transparency in Kingston hotel project
Stabroek News, Sunday, March 2nd 2008

Winston Murray

Representatives of the parliamentary opposition parties have expressed
concern about the lack of transparency in the awarding of land to a
consortium of unknown investors for the construction of a hotel in
Kingston, reportedly to carry the Marriott Hotels brand.

When this newspaper asked Prime Minister Samuel Hinds the week before
last who the investors for the hotel were, he responded, "I think it is
well known who these people are." When informed that the Stabroek News
did not know who they were, he replied, "Another time, not now."

None of the opposition parliamentarians to whom this newspaper spoke
was aware of the identity of the investors.

PNCR Chairman Winston Murray told Stabroek News that for the government
to maintain its own integrity and the integrity of the Battery Road,
Kingston hotel project, it needed to put all information on it in the
public domain.

Apart from the lack of transparency associated with awarding lands to
unknown investors, Murray told the Stabroek News there was also a great
deal of uncertainty as to whether or not the Marriott Hotels had given
the franchise to the investors.

"We do not know what has gone on behind the scenes," he said, adding
that "if the Marriott withdraws its franchise, we do not know if the
investors would be looking at alternatives or whether or not they would
cut their losses and move on."

With little or no information on the project coming from the
government, it appeared, he said, that the Marriott might be
reconsidering its endorsement.

The lack of transparency and accountability was a problem with the
Bharrat Jagdeo administration, Murray said, citing the manner in which
it was going about the hotel investment as a classic example.

There had been no bidding for the property in Kingston and no one knew
on what terms the property had been awarded or to whom. The process, he
repeated, should have been transparent.

He observed that he saw "no issue of confidentiality needed in that
process," and went on to refer to the land on which the National
Archives was currently located on Main Street, where the government
needed to do likewise.

"I don't think the government does itself any good by getting into
these transactions in an opaque manner; [it's] an act of betrayal of
accountability and transparency," he said, adding that "they need to
come clean on these projects and reveal the details to the public."

The opaque manner in which the transactions had been done, he
continued, represented a major drawback for the government since it
left room for rumours to run rife in the society, which was not in the
national interest because rumours tended to take on additional
dimensions.

Nothing was wrong with swapping lands in the nation's interest, he
said, if the exchange was fair in terms of market prices. Once the land
had been made available, certain negotiations and details of a project
would be subjected to confidential arrangements which should be
respected, Murray continued, but after negotiations had been completed
those details should be revealed.

Noting that the government was treating the lands as though they were
their private property, he said that the general public should have
been informed about the availability of the land for investment and for
what purposes.

Having had the chance to be a part of the tendering process and with
the award completed with information made available to the public, he
said that at that point it would be in the interest of the investors to
argue for confidentiality.

Asked to comment on the Kingston hotel investment and the exchange
arrangement involving the land on which the National Archives is
situated on Main Street, GAP-ROAR MP Everall Franklin told the Stabroek
News that that his party did not have enough information to comment
intelligently on them. Because of this, he would like details of the
projects to be made available, particularly on how the deals were
structured and the identity of the investors, given that the projects
in both cases were well underway.

"Once it is public lands the government cannot operate as though it is
private property," he said adding that at this stage when construction
had already begun it was incumbent on the government to let the
Guyanese people know who the investors were.

"It is not as though the investors have not acquired the property. They
have begun the groundwork and at this point the government ought to
make the details public. This would show clearly that they have nothing
to hide," he said.

He went on to say there was an added reason for revealing the identity
of the investors given that citizens were still getting problems in
obtaining leases and titles to state lands, and there was a backlog of
applications.

In respect of the deal between the government and a local businessman
to give land in Main Street in exchange for the construction of a
building to house the national archives on Homestretch Avenue, Franklin
said, "I don't think there should be any secret about that, once it was
done in accordance with the laws of Guyana."

"If it was done in a transparent manner and after a proper evaluation
and the government gets its value for money in the exchange, that
should be acceptable. These are the things that citizens ought to
know," he said.

Like Murray, Franklin and AFC Leader Raphael Trotman questioned the
lack of an open bidding process to give as wide a cross-section of the
society as possible an opportunity to be involved.

In addition Trotman told the Stabroek News that the AFC welcomed
investment to Guyana but due diligence had to be exercised because of
the challenges posed to economies by globalization. Some of the
challenges included money-laundering, which aided in funding terrorist
organisations from the proceeds of illicit trafficking in narcotic
drugs and weapons.

Trotman recalled that in the '80s and '90s the PPP was very critical of
the PNC administration over the Barama and Guyana Telephone and
Telegraph (GT&T) investments, forcing the government to be as
transparent as possible.

He too said it was difficult to be satisfied with the investment in a
hotel in Kingston and the deal involving the archives because the
details of those transactions had not made public.

Usually there was a lot of fanfare associated with a project such as a
hotel carrying the Marriott brand, and people would be apprised of it,
"but in this case there is, instead, something that is making us
uncomfortable," Trotman observed.

Reiterating that we definitely needed to know more about these
projects, he said that the PPP/C administration could find themselves
saddled with another national embarrassment.

Apart from the National Archives land on Main Street, he said there may
be a number of other government buildings on strategic sites that could
be surrendered for private development. However, fair market prices had
to be set for such exchanges so that they could stand the test of
scrutiny. (Miranda La Rose)

More political will needed here for mangrove protection -FAO report

2008-03-03T10:13:00.001-08:00

http://www.stabroeknews.com/index.pl/article?id=56540279

More political will needed here for mangrove protection -FAO report
Stabroek News, Monday, March 3rd 2008

Guyana has to show more political will in protecting mangroves for
their habitat and environmental richness, a report by the Food and
Agriculture Organisation (FAO) has said.

The report, entitled, 'The World's Mangroves 1980 to 2005',
acknowledges that afforestation and reforestation activities have taken
place in Guyana. But it says also that all South American countries
with the exception of Guyana have at least one Ramsar mangrove site,
indicating added political will to protect these habitats and their
environmental richness.

The Ramsar Convention on Wetlands, signed in Ramsar, Iran, in 1971, is
an intergovernmental treaty providing for national action and
international cooperation for the conservation and judicious use of
wetlands and their resources. Guyana is still to sign on.

"â€¦More efforts could be undertaken at the national and regional
levels to implement appropriate strategies and effectively protect
these ecosystems," the report points out. It further states that for
Guyana, updated inventories would contribute greatly to a better
estimate of the extent of mangroves.

Awareness is slowly building among coastal residents as to the
importance of mangroves to sea defence and work at the level of
government is progressing apace in Guyana's drive to regenerate and
conserve mangrove stands along the coastlands.

The FAO states that the world has lost around 3.6 million hectares of
mangroves since 1980, equivalent to an alarming 20 per cent loss of
total mangrove area, according to a recent mangrove assessment study.
However, the study also indicates that the rate of mangrove loss is
slowing around the world.

According to the report, the total mangrove area has declined from 18.8
million hectares in 1980 to 15.2 million in 2005, according to the
report. "There has, however, been a slowdown in the rate of mangrove
loss: from some 187,000 hectares destroyed annually in the 1980s to
102,000 hectares a year between 2000 and 2005, reflecting an increased
awareness of the value of mangrove ecosystems," the FAO said.

Although Guyana has commenced pilot projects across the country for the
regeneration of mangroves, a lot is still to be done on the social side
of things as it relates to people squatting on mangrove lands.

Vegetate

An official at the Sea Defence Division of the Ministry of Works,
Geoffrey Vaughn noted that people still continue to live illegally on
some of the dams where the mangroves should be freely allowed to
vegetate.

He said that apart from the European Union funding through the Eighth
European Development Fund (EDF) for shore zone management, the
government is getting some amount of funding from the World Bank for
the regeneration of mangroves.

"We just did a socio-economic study of the project areas under the
Eighth EDF and we intend to look at the findings and see how we will
proceed," Vaughn said, adding that the project areas included some
villages along the Corentyne Coast, West Coast Demerara and some
sections of the East Coast Demerara.

The government has included in the 2008 Budget an allocation of $2.2
billion for the construction, rehabilitation and maintenance of sea
defences and will include mangrove regeneration. Under this programme,
government will commence its shore zone management, which envisages the
cultivation of mangrove plantations, in appropriate locations, to be
utilised as natural sea defence barriers. These works will augment
additional works being done under other programmes on the sea defence.

In Berbice, the loss of mangrove forests was for the most part
attributable to the actions of humans. However, the depletion in the
Essequibo was found to be naturally occurring. On a visit to the
Corentyne during mid-2007, this newspaper learnt that mangroves were
still being burnt and used to build roads.

Personnel from the Sea Defence Division on the Essequibo Coast had told
this newspaper last year that there is a 20-year cycle of erosion for
the mangrove plants, during which they disappear for a while and then
return. At Westbury, Bounty Hall and Better Success on the Essequibo
Coast, there was erosion in some areas, while in others the foliage of
the mangroves was healthy.

The FAO cited high population pressure, the large-scale conversion of
mangrove areas for shrimp and fish farming, agriculture, infrastructure
and tourism, as well as pollution and natural disasters as the major
causes for the destruction of mangroves.

Workshop highlights forestry export procedures

2008-03-03T10:12:00.000-08:00

http://www.stabroeknews.com/index.pl/article?id=56540211

Workshop highlights forestry export procedures
Stabroek News, Sunday, March 2nd 2008

The requirements for exporting forestry products were highlighted at a
workshop hosted on Thursday by the Guyana Revenue Authority (GRA) in
collaboration with the Forestry Marketing Council of Guyana
Incor-porated.

The workshop aimed at ensuring that the Guyana Forestry Commission
(GFC), the Customs and Trade Administration (CTA) and stakeholders are
fully aware of their obligations regarding forestry export procedures,
the Government Information Agency (GINA) reported.

And Prime Minister Samuel Hinds who spoke at its opening at the CTA in
Main Street, said it was always impressive when a country's Gross
Domestic Product (GDP) is steadily increasing, adding that this could
only be achieved when all stakeholders produced and sold goods and
services of a better quality and greater worth.

In his address, Minister of Agriculture Robert Persaud said there had
been complaints by exporters of delays in the procedures and the
ministry through the GFC engaged with the CTA to deal with the matter
in a special workshop.

Stakeholders participated in an interactive consultation with the
objective of sharing ideas and improving the system of processing
documents to ensure that there are no delays in exports of forest
produce, Persaud said.

Meanwhile, Commission-er General of the GRA Khurshid Sattaur pointed
out that not only was it important to ensure there was maximum revenue
collection but there was also a need for the highest level of
transparency and accountability in executing duties involving all
parties - the packagers, exporters and customs brokers.

He acknowledged, GINA reported, that the present customs control
applied to goods may not be adequate but added that major restructuring
of the system was under way. This involves large-scale computerization,
which will reduce the human intervention in the process. In addition,
part of this system called the "Manifest Module" which requires the
sharing of data on goods moving from one country to another will allow
for more effective identification of high-risk traffic, GINA stated.

Head of the Finance Department at GFC Edward Goberdan observed that
over the past years exports of forestry products have increased
significantly and more markets are now demanding these products from
Guyana.

"Export plays a key role in boosting foreign exchange earnings in the
country and we certainly would like to see this increasing over the
coming years. For this reason the GFC has been working with exporters
and the CTA to enhance the process of exporting," Goberdan is quoted by
GINA as saying.

China Timber maps land acquisition spree

2008-03-03T10:07:00.000-08:00

South China Morning Post

September 24, 2007 Monday

China Timber maps land acquisition spree

BYLINE: Wong Ka-chun

SECTION: BUSINESS; Pg. 5

LENGTH: 340 words

China Timber Resources Group, a Hong Kong-listed forestry operator and
trading company, plans an aggressive acquisition of new forestry land
to grab more market share, according to chief executive Stephen Lau.
The company acquired two forestry sites recently in the South American
country of Guyana totalling 250,000 hectares - about 21/2 times the
size of Hong Kong - and is now actively moving to acquire further
sites in the mainland, said Mr Lau.
"China is full of resources and the government welcomes investments,"
Mr Lau said, adding that although the acquisition in Guyana could offer
the firm stable income in the first few years, the earnings driver in
the long term would come from expansion in the mainland.
"Supportive government policy, tight supply and heavy demand, as well
as lower operating costs, have lured us to accelerate our search for
investments in China," he said.
Under its expansion plans, China Timber expects each new investment
will involve at least 100,000 cubic metres along with 50-year operation
concessions.
A further new acquisition is expected to be completed before the end
of the year.
The mainland is ranked fifth-largest in the world in terms of total
forest reserves and is also the second-largest forest products importer
with imports of $10US billion in 2005.
The government officially opened the timber exploration market for
private-sector participation in 2003. Soaring demand for timber on the
mainland is driven mainly by the country's rapid economic expansion and
development of the downstream wood processing sector, according to a
report by Deutsche Bank.
China Timber is an upstream timber operator that engages in forest
operation and management, logging and timber processing and trading. It
also provides wood for downstream operators such as paper and
furniture makers, as well as construction material suppliers.
Hungry for wood
China is the second-largest forest products importer in the world
The size of China Timber's forestry sites in Guyana compared with Hong
Kong 2.5x

LOAD-DATE: September 24, 2007

LANGUAGE: ENGLISH

PUBLICATION-TYPE: Newspaper

Copyright 2007 South China Morning Post Ltd.
All Rights Reserved

Hinds very upbeat about mining after 2007 developments

2008-03-01T06:45:00.001-08:00

Hinds very upbeat about mining after 2007 developments
Guyana Chronicle, 29 February 2008

PRIME Minister Samuel Hinds has reported that 2007 was a very good year
for mining in Guyana.

He said total investment in the sector was estimated at US$100M, with
in excess of 12,000 small claims and 4,000 medium scale permits issued.

“The declared production of gold was 246,100 ounces and diamonds
286,925 carats, all from small and medium size operations,” said Mr.
Hinds, who has portfolio responsibility for the industry.

He said the year 2007 saw an upsurge in prospecting, with 26 foreign
companies actively exploring for minerals, among them Aranka Gold,
Strata Gold Resources, Sacre Coer Minerals, Gold Port Resources and BHP
Billiton.

Hinds said an estimate of 4.56 million ounces of gold (indicated and
inferred) was mined at Aurora along Cuyuni River, an area with a number
of other prospects.

He commended Guyana Goldfield Inc. for embarking on a feasibility study
for developing a hydropower site at the nearby Devil’s Hole rapids, on
Cuyuni River, as well, to supply electricity for a mine at that
hinterland undeveloped forest location.

Hinds pointed out that the Government welcomes and fully supports all
investment, foreign and local, specifically in mining.

“Our resounding message is that Guyana is open for business,” he stated.

Hinds said the mining industry continues to be one of the main
contributors to Guyana’s exports and provider of foreign currency.

He said Office of the Prime Minister (OPM) expects the industry will
grow from strength to strength and continue as one of the main legs of
the country’s economy.

Hinds said he is exuberant and extremely upbeat about the future of
mining, because of the many developments last year

Submission to the National Assembly

2008-03-01T06:44:00.001-08:00

GUYANA

COUNTY OF DEMERARA

In the matter of the WITHDRAWAL of
Bill number 21 of 2007:
Forest Bill 2007

SUBMISSION

TO:
The Clerk of Committee
Special Select Committee of the National Assembly
(Forests Bill 2007 - Bill No. 21 of 2007)
Committees Division
Parliament Office
Public Buildings
Brickdam
Georgetown.

THE HUMBLE SUBMISSION of we the undersigned citizens of Guyana who
respectfully request the withdrawal of Bill Number 21 of 2007, Forest
Bill 2007, is set out in three parts. Part 1 lists some observations on
individual sections in the Forest Bill 2007, with cross-reference to
the 6 February 2004 version. It notes a number of the sections and
clauses of the Draft Forests Act 2004 which have been excised from the
Forest Bill 2007 without explanation and justification for the
deliberate removal of some, and insertion of new clauses and sections
which, taken together, weaken the Forest Bill 2007. Part 2 sets out 15
general principles which we believe should guide the revision of the
Forests Act 1953 and all legislation. Part 3 lists some examples of the
many errors in Bill No. 21 of 2007, by way of illustrating the thorough
overhaul needed on this Forest Bill 2007 and which should now be
undertaken by competent technical persons.

The Special Select Committee of the National Assembly should ensure
that the key natural resources of our country, on which the future
sustainable development of Guyana hinges, are managed as required by
Article 36 in the National Constitution 1980 and so as to maximize the
net social benefit.

The purpose of the Submission (Parliamentary Standing Order 94 (13)(a)

This Submission calls for a complete overhaul of the Forest Bill number
21 of 2007 in order to:

a. restore Ministerial / National Assembly oversight
of the Guyana Forestry Commission which is entrusted with the
stewardship of the national public forest assets to be managed
according to Article 36 of the National Constitution 1980. It is
contrary to best international practice for a civil service
organization to have powers to allocate to others substantial areas of
national forest for decades without provision for democratic review of
the appropriateness of such allocations and the effectiveness and
efficiency of the management of such allocated forest. At the least,
State Forest authorisations of all kinds should be given under the
hand of the Minister.

b. correct those features in legal drafting which
weaken the law in comparison with previous draft.

c. correct those features in legal drafting which are
contrary to best international practice.

Background

More than half a century has passed since the 1953 Forests Act was
drawn up by the lawyer-forester W.A. Gordon to address the particular
problems of that era – primarily to create the classification of Crown
Forests (now State Forests), harmonise forestry-related legislation
scattered throughout other Acts with those in the new Act, de-link the
conservation and administration of forests from the revenue collection
focus of the Department of Lands and Mines, and create a Forest
Department.

The process of revising that 1953 Forests Act underwent several
iterations from the mid-1990s. The final publicly-available draft
Forests Act 2004 benefited from the vision for the forestry sector set
out in the National Development Strategy 2000-2010 and from broad
stakeholder consultations and international best practice at that time.
However, the legislative revisions of 1995-6 are now insufficient to
adjust to the newer international imperatives concerning trade in
tropical timbers and the need for independently verifiable proof of
legal and sustainable production.

The special hazard of Forest Bill 2007
Unlike the Draft Forests Act 2004, there are few safeguards in the
draft Forest Bill 2007 against a bureaucracy captured by special
interests. This change, a reflection of the exceptional profits to be
made from expanded Asian demand for raw materials especially in the
booming economies of China and India, deprives Guyana of the
opportunities to secure for our country a greater share in those
profits and without detriment to our long-term productivity. To make
that happen, we must ensure that the bureaucracy does not take to
itself discretionary powers without public oversight. Best
international practice is indeed in quite the opposite direction: to
capture excess rent through transparently-set charges, to reduce
discretion from bureaucrats, to insist on published criteria for
exceptional cases, and to increase public oversight especially through
parliamentary processes. Public notice has been reduced and highly
circumscribed. The draft Forest Bill 2007 was circulated only to the
Members of the National Assembly, on 2 August 2007 and only in printed
format. The draft Forest Bill 2007 and the ‘Final GFC Bill – Nov 2006’
– were only placed on the GFC website sometime after 15 August 2007.
The Draft Forests Act 2004 was more widely available in print and
electronic formats.

We note the simplicity and clarity of the Forests Act 1953 in
comparison with the convoluted and unclear wording in the Forest Bill
2007. This lack of clarity alone should cause this Bill to be sent
back for a thorough re-drafting.

We respectfully remind you of the historic responsibility before you to
review the Forest Bill 2007 section by section, clause by clause,
against the Draft Forests Act 2004, against the backdrop of the
changing circumstances of the forestry sector in our country today. We
urge you to be mindful of the urgent need to safeguard our sovereignty,
as well as seeking to ensure good governance, transparency in decision
making and accountability for decisions in all public institutions
charged with the administration of national patrimony. You may wish to
take note of a recent World Bank caution with respect to the award of
forest concessions, “Where the concession in effect transfers a public
property right into private hands, there may be traditional or
constitutional reasons to require higher-level approval, such as action
by the legislature, the head of government, or the head of state”
(Forest Law and Sustainable Development: addressing contemporary
challenges through legal reform. Law, Justice, and Development Series.
2007, p. 57. Washington D.C.: The World Bank).

We urge you to examine the systematic culling of all participatory
processes, oversight and best practice from the Draft Forests Act 2004,
including but not limited to the following fundamental revisions:

Part 1
Some observations on individual sections in the Forest Bill 2007, with
cross-reference to the 6 February 2004 version

1.1 Vesting of wide discretion and monopoly power in “the Commission”

1.1.1 There are over a dozen references in the Draft Forests Act 2004
to the Board of Directors of the Guyana Forestry Commission (GFC) and
none in the Forest Bill 2007. In its place, broad discretionary powers
are vested exclusively in the “Commission”. . Placing limits on a
discretionary power is a trend in modern legislation, aimed at making
public officers more accountable. The Forest Bill 2007 transfers and
enlarges broad powers to the “Commission” without criteria for their
use. There is no reason why the GFC should have any discretion when no
test criteria are proposed.

1.1.2 The over 30 references to the Minister in the Draft Forests Act
2004 have been reduced to fewer than five, thereby eliminating even the
nominal control by elected Ministers.

1.1.3 The practical effect of this Bill depends very much upon the
nature of the forest regulations. It is unusual for the Bill to be
presented for parliamentary consideration without the draft regulations
being available at the same time. This suggests that the National
Assembly’s Select Committee on Natural Resources should insist upon the
draft regulations being made available from the start of any review by
the Select Committee.

1.1.4 The procedures for competitive bidding for a forest concession
set out in 16 (6) of the Draft Forests Act 2004 have been neutered.
Section 8 of the Forest Bill 2007 vests the power to grant or renew
large-scale concessions in the 'Commission'; power which is now held by
the Minister of Forestry. This means that the issuing of large-scale
concessions (the former TSAs and WCLs) is now under sole GFC (civil
service) control; with no input from Parliament or the more broadly
constituted Government. Such Parliamentary process is usual when
concessions are long-term and/or large-scale. In this case, long-term
means up to 40 years, and large-scale means over 8,000 hectares. Such
resources are tremendously valuable, including as collateral for bank
loans, and so should be subject to political oversight, not just civil
service administrative procedure, especially when the supervision
prescribed in this draft Forest Bill 2007 is undemanding.

1.1.5 The provisions for indexation against inflation of volume charges
and levies on forest produce and administrative fees set out in s.
50(1) and (2) of the Draft Forests Act 2004 have been excised, with the
exception of Schedule 1 – Penalties for Offences – and there is no
provision for adjusting charges affected by currency movements. The
charging of interest on arrears (s. 51) of the Draft Forests Act 2004
has been replaced by Section 74 of Forests Bill 2007. The latter deals
only with the charging of interest on fees due to the Commission, and
not to fees due to the Consolidated Fund which was in the 2004 version.

1.1.6 Guyana has traditionally charged very low royalty rates for
timber extracted from its natural forests. All, or almost all,
consultancy reports on Guyana’s forest revenues advocate that there
should be a much simplified system and that the intrinsic rent should
be captured for central government Consolidated Fund. The major charge
in State Forest authorisations should be that in section 80 (1) (e),
the area concession rental, to be paid directly into the Consolidated
Fund. The justification for royalty (section 80 (1) (d)) is weak. The
proposal to pass this weakly justified charge to the Consolidated Fund
and to allow the GFC to retain all the other complex maze of charges is
contrary to repeated recommendations and to best practice, and should
not be supported in the Forest Bill 2007. Fees for all applications
under the Bill are dealt with in clause 80 – but are left to be
determined by the Minister as components of the Forest Regulations
which should be presented to the National Assembly in parallel with
this Forest Bill 2007; see 1.1.3 above. The application fee of US
$20,000 for an Exploratory Permit (in 16 (2) of the Draft Forests Act
2004) has been removed.

1.1.7 Discretionary power is granted in s. 13 (2) of the draft Forest
Bill 2007 to the Commission to waive a security bond; such a bond
provides the State with financial cover against environmental damage
and non-payment of charges, and was spelled out in s. 26 of the draft
Forests Act 2004. There should be no waiver.

1.2 Restriction of activities / Amerindian customary rights in State
Forests
1.2.1 Section 5 (2) (e) – introduces definitions which are
inappropriate in forest legislation and should be dealt with, if at
all, under Amerindian legislation. Consequently, sub-section (3)
should also be deleted, and anyway is not appropriate in forest
legislation. Definitions concerning Amerindians should refer to the
Amerindian Lands Commission Act 1966 or the Amerindian Act 2006, or to
international conventions concerning indigenous and traditional
peoples. Section 5. (2)(e) in the Forest Bill 2007 permits the granting
of a concession on claimed Amerindian land, thereby removing the
safeguard provided in the Forests (Amendment) (Exploratory Permits) Act
1997. The saving of Amerindian customary rights, set out in Clause
17(3) of the Draft Forests Act 2004 appears to have been excised.

1.2.2 Section 5. (2)(e) amounts to a saving of traditional Amerindian
rights in State forests, but there are two objectionable features to
it:

First, only rights, etc. held immediately before the coming into force
of the legislation will be saved. This freezes traditional rights at a
particular date, whereas the customs, practices and traditions of any
community of people are not static. If indigenous peoples were not able
to evolve and adapt to changing circumstances then they would have long
since become extinct. The restriction in this clause denies them that
freedom to adapt.

Second, only rights, etc. that are “exercised or performed sustainably
in accordance with the spiritual relationship of the group with the
land” are saved under this provision. Best practice, as in Australia
and Canada, makes broader provision.

1.3 General saving of Amerindian rights – omitted
Clause 63 in the 2004 draft Forests Act has not been reproduced in the
draft Forest Bill 2007. That clause provided:
“63(1) For the purposes of this Act, all lands in State forests
occupied or used by Amerindian communities and all land necessary for
the quiet enjoyment by the Amerindians of any Amerindian settlement,
are deemed to be lawfully occupied by them.
(2) Nothing in this Act shall be construed to prejudice, alter, or
affect any right or privilege heretofore legally possessed, exercised
or enjoyed by any Amerindian in Guyana.”

This savings clause, in one form or another, has been in natural
resources legislation in Guyana from since the mid-nineteenth century.
The 2004 draft Forests Act, based on the 1989 Mining Act provision, is
strongly worded and could be construed as saving traditional rights
even in granted State forests.

Although clause 5(2)(e) of the draft Forest Bill 2007 saves traditional
rights in State forests, the omission of a clause comparable to 63(2)
set out above means that there is nothing to prevent the State from
issuing forest concessions on untitled Amerindian lands. The avoidance
of State Forest Exploratory Permits being issued over land subject to
Amerindian land claims has been omitted from the Forest Bill 2007, an
omission potentially conflicting with the Amerindian Lands Commission
Act 1966.

Further, although the Amerindian Act 2006 saves traditional Amerindian
rights in State lands/forests, this is expressly confined to the
provisions of that Act. Finally, the omission of any such general
savings clause means that the provisions authorizing the issue of a
forest concession will probably operate to terminate pre-existing
rights over the area comprising the grant, at least in relation to
obtaining forest produce.

Guyana is unusual in not having a formal settlement procedure
associated with government attempts to declare public land as State
Forest or an area protected for conservation of (forest) habitat or
biodiversity. In the absence of integrated land use planning, as
recommended in the National Development Strategy 2001-2010, such
declarations can appear arbitrary and unjust. There are ample and
detailed descriptions in the technical literature on the operation of
long-tested reservation and settlement processes, which should be built
into the revised Forest Bill. That should help to clarify customs,
privileges and rights associated with previous and current use of
natural resources. It could also provide the equivalent of a
roundtable for considering the increasing demands on natural resources,
and the conflicts which arise from increasing demographic pressure.

1.4 Rights of passage over public lands
Section 5 (1) (a) – Amerindians have rights of passage over public
lands, and anyone can use a road on public land if there is no trespass
(causing damage; see the Public Lands (Private Roads) Act, cap.62:03).
These rights should be recognised in this Bill. It is unclear why
there is not a general permission for any person to enter State Forest
as a publicly owned asset, provided that such entry does not constitute
trespass (that is, no damage is caused).

1.5 Private trading of public forest assets – s. 6
Clause 6. (1) among others in the Forest Bill 2007 could lead to the
legalization of the current illegal trading of forest concessions,
instead of requiring the GFC to develop and implement a Strategic Plan
for concession allocation and recision before advertising new or repeat
areas (National Forest Policy of October 1997 (section III B 1 b) and
the National Forest Plan of February 2001 (section NFP320).

Given the present illegal trading of concessions, which has now
resulted in the concentration of the best stocked and the lion’s share
of State forests under the control of a few foreign companies, the
Forests Act should limit the transferability of concessions. The draft
Forest Bill 2007 does the opposite.

1.6 Grant/renewal of larger concessions – s. 8
The Commission is empowered to renew long-term large-scale forest
concessions in spite of their non-compliance with the terms of the
concession award (Section 6.(8)). This is predicated upon the approval
of a forest management plan and an annual operations plan for the
concession area sought. The rest of Forest Bill 2007 is entirely silent
as to substance or procedure applying to this requirement.

1.7 Exploratory permit – s. 9
The safeguards set out in the Forests (Amendment) (Exploratory Permits)
Act 1997 have been rendered useless as a block on piratical logging.
Clauses 9. (1), 9.(2)(b) among others in the Forest Bill 2007 allows
commercial logging during the period of an exploratory award (SFEP) so
as to recover a proportion of the investors' application fee and other
non-capital costs associated with gaining and operating the SFEP. As no
criteria are given, the investor can inflate costs to the point at
which the SFEP becomes indistinguishable from a Timber Sales Agreement.
Section 9 (3) (a) – should read “invite applications to bid for an
exploratory permit . . .”. It is contrary to the intentions of the
SFEP that it should be awarded administratively to a single applicant.
This suggests an intention to evade wide advertisement and competitive
bidding, entirely negating the intentions behind SFEPs. Section 9 (7)
is redundant because all SFEPs should be subject to multiple bids.
Administrative negotiation is absolutely contrary to best international
practice, because it constitutes a major entry point for corrupt
practices.

1.8 Transfer of permits, concessions and licences – s. 15 and 16
This section needs revision to take account of the rampant illegal
sub-contracting of concessions which brings no economic or social
benefit to Guyana. It is unclear why the wording of section 16 is so
convoluted compared with the much simpler wording in section 15 in the
February 2004 version. What is important is the prevention of rentier
behaviour (sub-letting) which negates the principle of open tenders and
bidding for rights to access publicly-owned assets. This
under-the-table consolidation of public assets is nowhere sanctioned in
law or policy in Guyana.

1.9 Community Forest Management Agreement (CFMA) – s. 11
What is striking about this clause is its obfuscation. It omits any
mention of rights to utilize forest produce in community forests, but
the substituted language does not spell out exactly what would be
permitted therein. Under sub-clause (2) it is provided (guardedly) that
a CFMA may help communities “benefit” from local forests but there is
no indication of how such benefits will come about. That some kind of
commercial activity is contemplated is clear because of the rest of the
provision that speaks of economic development and income generation.

This clause is also unconstitutional, at least insofar as it sanctions
the uncompensated appropriation of untitled Amerindian lands. Under
sub-clause (4) persons “having strong traditional ties to use of the
forest” must be given “a free and fair opportunity to join…” the group.
Since this formulation captures Amerindians who live on untitled lands
and possess traditional rights as recognised under the common law, the
law must provide for consultation with them, and in the event that they
(the Amerindians) do not wish to join the group, then the forest can
only be granted to third parties if said Amerindians are compensated
for the loss of their traditional rights.

The draft must therefore specify a procedure consistent with the
Constitution whereby persons fitting the description in 11(4) may be
promptly and adequately compensated if they withhold their consent –
which it fails to do [see recommendation for a formal settlement
procedure in 1.3 above].

1.10 Conservation on private lands – s. 31
What is proposed here is effectively expropriation of private property
without prior independently-chaired public inquiry into the
justification. Much of the reasoning given in sub-section (2) pertains
to the EPA, not to the GFC. It would be more appropriate to manage
conservation on private land through the in-draft legislation on the
Guyana Protected Area System. It is not clear whether the provision
requiring payment of compensation [sub-clause (6)] meets the
constitutional standard. In this respect the Constitutional provision
as amended in 2003 waters down the 1980 version, but even in its
attenuated form the standard does not seem to be met.

Under Article 142 of the Constitution as amended any law providing for
expropriation must require the “prompt payment of adequate
compensation”, but Forest Bill 2007 (s. 31) merely requires the payment
to the owner and lawful occupier “reasonable” compensation. These seem
to impose different standards (i.e., no mention at all of promptness –
an issue in expropriation cases in the Caribbean; and reasonableness
may be judged from a wider variety of considerations than adequacy).

Also, is a declaration under this provision intended to operate
indefinitely?

1.11 Code of Practice – s. 35
Any code of practice to be adopted will be an important document – it
will seek to regulate forest operations, breach of the code being a
criminal offence. This is a good thing, but to what extent will
stakeholders and rights-holders be able to contribute meaningfully to
the content of any such code of practice?

In answering this question, one is hampered by the guarded language of
the provision. 35(2)(a)(ii) merely provides that the Minister shall
notify the public of the “purport” of the proposed code and shall
receive written submissions thereafter. Written submissions are limited
to three aspects: the fact that a proposed code has been submitted to
the Minister, the purport of the proposed code and the location where
the proposed code may be inspected [see 35(2)(c)].

“Purport” means “purpose” or “intention” – this is not the same as
contents. Therefore on a very strict interpretation, does this
provision impose an obligation on the government to receive submissions
on the contents of the Code, as opposed to its mere intention or
purpose?

Semantics aside, and assuming that people are allowed to make
submissions on content, there is still no real obligation on the
government to take on board any comments so received. The government
has complete control over what goes into the Code – the GFC comes up
with it, they must “invite and receive” written submissions but do NOT
necessarily have to hold public hearings thereon, and thereafter
consultation is with the Minister. Nowhere in this is there a process
whereby non-governmental entities or persons can have a more meaningful
input. At the end of the day, all submissions can be rejected (i.e.,
consultation does not equal acceptance) for as the provision makes
clear, the Minister may either (a) adopt the code as is, (b) adopt it
with changes or (c) reject it.
Finally, although the Code is subject to negative resolution in
Parliament, in a situation of majority rule that is no protection.

And by the way, what happens if the Minister decides to reject the
Code? The draft is completely silent on this point – will it be subject
to further consultation or what?

1.12 Quality control – s. 42
Note that in coming up with guidelines by which timber is to be graded
and marked, the GFC may “exempt any class of persons, activities or
land”. [42(4)(c)]. This is yet another instance of discretionary powers
which do not spell out the reason for their existence. The provision
itself should give reasons defining the Commission’s power to make
exemptions.

1.13 Transfer pricing – s. 45
It is unclear how a prescribed body would determine “true market
value”. This section appears to be unwarranted government interference
in normal commercial practice, and is not in accordance with best
international practice. The performance of the Forest Products
Marketing Council (FPMC) so far suggests that it would be incompetent
in any such role. It is the responsibility of the Customs
Administration of the Guyana Revenue Authority to detect and prevent
under-invoicing, mis-declaration and under-declaration of export goods.
It is unclear why the GFC should seek a parallel role.

1.14 Forest Officer – s. 53
Under 53(4)(a) a forest officer may “at any time, after being afforded
natural justice, be removed from office at the discretion of the
Commissioner”.

This provision is either poorly drafted or reflects retrograde policy.
Perhaps the Commissioner’s discretion to remove is constrained by the
results of the hearing, but the phrasing of the provision does not
necessarily suggest this. In any event, since Guyana already has
legislation governing employment and labour why is the Commissioner of
Forests being given a discretionary power such as this?

1.15 Powers to enter premises and conduct searches – ss. 54 et. seq.
Note all the powers to enter and search without a warrant. Since the
ammunition and narcotic offences of the late 1980s, this has been the
trend of legislation in Guyana – to whittle away at established common
law protections.

Allowing the police to stop and search individuals and vehicles or to
enter and search premises merely on reasonable suspicion opens the door
to abuse; in this draft Forest Bill 2007 the power is extended to
forest officers. This is an unjustifiable assault on civil liberties.

1.16 Powers to require answers – s. 61
Under this provision suspects must answer questions and even give a
signed statement. Do not be fooled by 61(2) since if one refuses to
answer under this apparent exception then such a course will impact
negatively on the suspect (i.e., an indication of guilt). This is
reinforced by the failure to make any such refusal to answer
inadmissible at trial.

This is a retrograde provision. However tough a stance towards criminal
activity it may encompass, it is against the trend in most civilized
countries where the right to silence (which includes the right to
remain silent during pre-trial questioning) forms a core component of
fair criminal investigations and a fair trial.

Given our oppressive history of policy brutality and forced
confessions, we should not be creating these powers. Let the State do
its investigative work and not invade the liberty of the subject.

1.17 Orders to desist – s. 62
Superficially read, this provision seems to operate as a substitute for
trial. On the mere suspicion of having committed an offence, a forest
officer can order a suspect to cease offending. Failure to abide by any
order made is an offence [see s. 68(a)(ix)]. But what happens to
persons who have rights under this or any other piece of legislation?
What procedure exists for establishing one’s legitimacy? How long does
an order made under this provision last? None of these issues is
addressed in this clause. In other words, what this provision means is
that persons may be deprived of legal rights upon the summary decision
of a State official, which is unlawful and unconstitutional.

Any order to desist should only be issued after an investigation is
conducted, and should in fact be issued by a neutral entity
(magistrate, not forest officer).

1.18 Exemptions – s. 76
Another discretionary power: i.e, it gives the government power to
create special regimes outside of the protections conferred by this
Act.

1.19 Net forest revenue to the Consolidated Fund – s. 80
Clauses 80 (1)(d) and 80 (3) provides for only the royalties from small
concessions, the current State Forest Permissions, to be paid into the
Consolidated Fund. All the other forest charges would remain with the
GFC. This is just the opposite of repeated recommendations that the
GFC should have transparent and simplified charges, with the surplus,
net of operational expenses, to be paid into the Consolidated Fund.
The long-term GFC failure to pass over its surplus to the Ministry of
Finance provides an indication of the future fate of national wealth.

1.20 Section 81 – the obligation on the Minister to act positively
requires the words “may make regulations” to “shall make regulations”.
No regulation, qualification or restriction, or qualification or
restriction in the regulations, shall change the meaning or intention
in the Act itself. In particular, the regulations must prevent
under-the-table transfers in effective managerial or financial control
of a State Forest authorisation. A holder becoming technically or
financially unable or unwilling to manage the authorised area in
accordance with the laws, regulations and specific terms of the
authorisation must surrender the authorisation forthwith, and that area
shall be returned to the strategic reserve of State Forest for
competitive allocation in accordance with the concession strategy
required by the National Forestry Policy 1997 and the National Forest
Plan 2001. This is to control the widespread abuse of the concession
system which the GFC has been unwilling or unable to control during the
last decade.

Part 2 – General principles that should guide the legislative process

2.1 Formulation of legislation by a participative process open to all
stakeholders (legitimately interested parties, not restricted to
primary stakeholders whose economic interests might be affected
positively or negatively by the legislation). The concentration of
previous discussions on bilateral debate between the Forest Products
Association (FPA) and the Guyana Forestry Commission (GFC), without an
independent chairman or professional facilitator, lengthened the
consultation period into years. As a result, the Forest Bill 2007 has
failed to adjust to the newer international imperatives concerning
trade in tropical timbers and the need for independently verifiable
proof of legal and sustainable production; these features were little
discussed at the time of the original formulation of the legislative
revision of 1995-6.

2.2 Given the geographic dispersion of forest-related stakeholders, a
concentration of consultation in Georgetown and restricted to industry
does not conform to best international practice.

2.3 Use of transparent process, with all relevant documents being
available on request to all stakeholders, perhaps for a nominal
administrative charge to avoid waste. The only justifications for
restriction of documents would be national security and commercial
confidentiality, with criteria defined and published openly prior to
the start of the legislative process.

2.4 During the consultations, participants treat each other
respectfully and have equal voices. Government agencies do not
over-rule other participants and do not have weighted votes. The
setting of some ground rules may be appropriate – for example, outside
the consultations, participants do not attribute views or statements
made during the consultations to named individuals or organisations.

2.5 Legislation and regulations are drafted with clarity of language,
using the simplest possible terms which are compatible with legal
specificity. The complex and at times ungrammatical language of the
Forest Bill 2007 needs to be thoroughly overhauled to improve clarity.

2.6 Technical wording and guidance can be drawn from FAO Forestry
Papers, the FAO Development Law Service and recent World Bank
documents, whose use should be conducive to greater clarity.

2.7 Harmonisation with other Laws of Guyana, avoiding duplication,
avoiding adding definitions unnecessarily – for example, on Amerindian
rights, privileges and customs – and removal of inconsistencies between
laws. There would be obvious advantages in harmonising forestry and
mining laws, especially as regards administration of concessions.

2.8 Providing for greater integration of laws, regulations and
procedures, especially in relation to integrated land use planning, an
integrated hinterland road network and the rehabilitation of a publicly
accessible integrated geographic information system – GINRIS, the
Guyana Integrated Natural Resources Information System, pioneered in
the late 1990s. Given the loss of maps and aerial photographs at the
GFC Head Office through neglect and flooding, the law should provide
for such maps (with associated textual descriptions) and GIS
(geographical information system) to be duplicated at regular and
frequent intervals in the National Archive. Public access and use
should be reserved only if explicit tests of national security or
commercial confidentiality can be proved; criteria should be built into
the law. Bearing in mind the increasing sophistication of Google Earth
and the international accessibility of such imagery, it would be
pointless for the government to seek to prevent access to what can be
obtained internationally. In particular, all State Forest boundary and
block maps, and all concession boundary maps, should be publicly
available. Such access will in any case be required for independent
forest monitoring if Guyana should seek a voluntary partnership
agreement with the European Union (EU) trading bloc for continued
exports of timber from Guyana into EU countries; under the EU Forest
Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade (FLEGT) process.

2.9 In best international practice, administrative discretion in law is
minimised. Where discretion is the alternative to prescriptions
covering a wide range of situations, criteria for the use of that
discretion should be included in the law. These criteria should be
explicit, objective and transparent. There should also be a public
appeals process associated with each instance of discretion in the law.
An appeals panel or tribunal should include at least two people not
employees of or associated with the national forest service;
association by membership of the Board of Directors or by employment as
an external consultant within the last two years would be examples of
disqualification from participation in such a panel or committee.
These provisions should apply to all levels of discretion, including
the Minister of Forestry, the Minister for Forestry, and the Guyana
Forestry Commission.

2.10 There are numerous instances in the draft Forest Bill 2007 which
state that “the Commission may . . .” without providing any reason why
the action should be conditional. Without explanation of the need for
conditionality, and without associated criteria for the application of
discretion, the word “may” should be replaced by “shall”. In other
words, the Commission must deliver the action without delay or
equivocation. Examples are in relation to the provision of various
kinds of State Forest authorisations. It is similarly wrong to allow
the GFC to apply “any conditions it thinks fit” without explaining why
such discretion is necessary or what transparent and objective criteria
will be applied.

2.11 Guyana is unusual in not having a formal settlement procedure
associated with government attempts to declare public land as State
Forest or an area protected for conservation of (forest) habitat or
biodiversity. In the absence of integrated land use planning, such
declarations can appear arbitrary and unjust. There are ample and
detailed descriptions in the technical literature on the operation of
long-tested reservation and settlement processes, which should be built
into the revised Forest Bill. That should help to clarify customs,
privileges and rights associated with previous and current use of
natural resources. It could also provide the equivalent of a
roundtable for considering the increasing demands on natural resources,
and the conflicts which arise from demographically increasing
Amerindian communities but rather static methods of agricultural
production, and the so far unresolved conflicts between mining and
other forms of land use, including forestry. The forest law should
have regard to the provisions in the National Constitution for
compensation for expropriated land. [this paragraph expands 1.3]

2.12 The revised forest law should include wording which responds to
forest provisions in the UN Framework Convention for the Conservation
of Biological Diversity (CBD, which Guyana has signed/ratified) and the
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), where
such provisions are not already found in the Environmental Protection
Act of 1996.

2.13 “There must be clear tests of evidence (i.e. criteria and
indicators) to determine compliance with each law or regulation . . .
There should be practical ways to carry out such tests in the field”
(from the European Commission’s FLEGT Briefing Note 02, series 2007
“What is legal timber?”).

2.14 Generally, provisions for extension or renewal of State Forest
authorisations and all other kinds of permits are poorly described. As
noted in 2.10 above, the GFC should have no right to impose
unrestricted conditions. Monitoring of performance should be standard
before considering extensions or renewals. The management charge
(section 80 (1) (c)) should be sufficient for and applied to such
monitoring.

2.15 The Select Committee should benefit from a review of the
publication issued by Forest Trends in January 2008 titled ‘Investment
in the Liberian Forest Sector: a road map to legal forest operations in
Liberia’ (url = http://www.forest-trends.org/) which sets out a series
of simple best practice measures for good forest governance, and lists
URLs for documents including Liberia’s Forest Regulations and Public
Procurement and Concessions Act. Liberia has been assisted
internationally to incorporate best practices in law and regulation,
and has incorporated several lessons relevant to good governance in
procurement (concessions), in transparency of procedures and
communications, and in anti-corruption measures. This set of
legislation is notably simpler in wording than the convoluted phrasing
of the Forest Bill 2007.

Part 3
Some observations on individual sections in the Forest Bill 2007, with
cross-reference to the 6 February 2004 version.

Section 2 – interpretation

This section is poorly arranged. The suffix “State Forest” has been
used to separate items which should be grouped together. For example,
it does not make sense to have “forest concession agreement” in one
place under F and “State Forest authorisation” in another place under
S.

Compliance history – if there is no means of checking compliance
history from other countries, why mention “and elsewhere”? The
definition appears to include car parking offences and speeding
charges. Presumably the intention concerns criminal offences.

Forest – (b) (iii) should explicitly include the genetic resources.

Forest conservation operations – (b) should include habitat and
landscape features.

Forest produce – (c) includes (a) and (b), making (a) and (b)
redundant. Include genetic resources in this definition.

Kaieteur National Park – the date of the Act is missing.

Publicly notify and public notice – should include posting to websites
and, as appropriate for large-scale, long-term concessions, notices
published outside Guyana.

Sawpit – is not defined.

Sustainable forest management – the word “amenities” is undefined, and
should be substituted by terms defined previously.

Section 3 – declaration of State Forest

See general comment number 2.11 above. Guyana needs a conventional
reservation and settlement procedure, to replace this land-grabbing
intention.

Section 4 – purpose of Part 2

Should reference Article 36 in the National Constitution about the
management of Guyana’s natural resources.

Section 5 (1) (a) – Amerindians have rights of passage over public
lands, and anyone can use a road on public land if there is no trespass
(causing damage; see the Public Lands (Private Roads) Act, cap.62:03).
These rights should be recognised in this Bill. It is unclear why
there is not a general permission for any person to enter State Forest
as a publicly owned asset, provided that such entry does not constitute
trespass (that is, no damage is caused). This would be the equivalent
of the Scandinavian “right to roam”.

Section 5 (2) (e) – introduces definitions which are inappropriate in
forest legislation and should be dealt with, if at all, under
Amerindian legislation. Consequently, sub-section (3) should also be
deleted, and anyway is not appropriate in forest legislation.
Definitions concerning Amerindians should refer to the Amerindian Lands
Commission Act 1966 or the Amerindian Act 2006, or to international
conventions concerning indigenous and traditional peoples.

Section 6 (2) (d) – as loosely worded now, could allow a concession
holder to infringe the rights and degrade the resources held by another
concession holder.

Section 6 (3) – the words “even if” are presumably inserted because the
GFC has failed by 2007 to implement the National Forest Policy 1997 and
the National Forest Plan 2001 which require strategic planning for
allocation of concessions and which ought to assign priorities in use
such that conflicts between harvest and no-harvest operations are
avoided. The law should not provide excuses for performance failures
by the GFC.

Sections 6 (4) and (5), and 9 (5) – no criteria are given for the GFC
to carry out evaluations. “Every person” is meaningless in relation to
transnational corporate entities.

Section 6 (6) – it is inappropriate to set time limits in the law.
These should be in regulations. Moreover, it is wrong to prescribe
awards of national public assets to private enterprises without
provision for prescribed reviews and performance indicators at frequent
intervals – the 1993 concession policy requires the GFC to carry out
audits at frequencies of two years.

Sections 6 (7), and 10 (4), and 25 (3), and 46 (c), and 72 (6) –
delete the unqualified discretionary power of the GFC; see general
point number 2.10 above.

Section 6 (8) – no criteria are given to interpret “not substantially
complied with”. No examples are given of the special circumstances
which could be invoked. The Guyanese people are entitled to expect
that special care and transparent decision making will be applied to
the management of public assets such as natural resources.

Sections 7 (1) (a), and 9 (3) (a) and (b) – no description is given as
to what “public notice” means. Clearly, in relation to Foreign Direct
Investment (FDI) policy, public notice should include international
advertisement, as envisaged in 1996-2002 for the State Forest
Exploratory Permits (SFEP).

Sections 7 (2), and 9 (3) (b) – “at its offices” – means all GFC
stations all over the country, but no provision for overseas bidders?
Why should documents always be priced? Why should they not be free of
charge to interested parties, with the cost covered by the application
fees? The latter would be much simpler and cheaper to administer. Why
should the GFC determine which documents are relevant? – that should be
the judgement of the applicants, some of whom may need more information
than others. This is another example of attempts at arbitrary GFC
control over matters which it does not understand.

Section 8 (1) (b) – no definition of “duly constituted”.

Section 8 (2) – no provision for transitional arrangements, given that
few Timber Sales Agreement (TSA) holders currently comply with this
provision.

Sections 9 (1) and (2) (b) – the provision for recovery of costs by
commercial logging is entirely contrary to the intention of the State
Forest Exploratory Permits (SFEP) in 1995-7, and is incompatible with
the requirements of sections 6 (4) and (5) (b) “the person . . . has
the competence and resources to carry out the operations”. Moreover,
no criteria are given for determining what costs and expenses would be
allowable. Given that no forest management plan is required, the
exploratory operations could be indistinguishable from commercial
unsustainable logging.

Section 9 (3) (a) – should read “invite applications to bid for an
exploratory permit . . .”. It is contrary to the intentions of the
SFEP that it should be awarded administratively to a single applicant.
This suggests an intention to evade wide advertisement and competitive
bidding, entirely negating the intentions behind SFEPs. Section 9 (7)
is redundant because all SFEPs should be subject to multiple bids.
Administrative negotiation is absolutely contrary to best international
practice, as a major entry point for corrupt practices.

Section 9 (10) – applications for concessions by SFEP holders should be
subject to verified satisfactory completion of all the specified
activities required in an exploratory permit, for the whole area of the
SFEP. Partial completion in time or space should not be allowed; the
opportunities for abuse are quite evident.

Section 10 (1) - change “The Commission may . . . “ to “The Commission
shall . . .”; see general point number 2.10 above. There is no reason
why the GFC should have any discretion when no test criteria are
proposed. The GFC needs to think out more clearly which activities
could be carried out simultaneously in a forest and which require, by
their nature, exclusive use; see also sections 14 (1) (f) and (2). Is
hunting differentiated from wildlife capture, which is regulated by
another law? Provision for hunting in section 10 (1) (c) appears to be
incompatible with section 10 (2).

Section 11 (1) (a) – “registered community forestry organization” is
undefined.

Sections 11 (2) and (5) – sustainable management is incompatible with a
duration limited to two years. The absence of requirement for a forest
management plan appears to open a door for illegal logging

Section 11 (4) – “free and fair opportunity” is undefined.
Manipulation of associations of small-scale loggers by the GFC
indicates no empathy for community dynamics or support for the
community-benefitting business development of the associations. It is
questionable if the GFC has any right to pass judgement on these
associations per se. It would be preferable for the associations to be
treated like all other applicants for State Forest authorisations,
leaving business support services such as the Linden Economic
Advancement Project (LEAP) and the Trades Union Congress (TUC) to
advise on and support the development of the associations.
Compensation would be needed for Amerindians with claims over State
Forest who do not wish to join a community forestry organization.

Section 12 - change “The Commission may . . . “ to “The Commission
shall . . .”; see general point number 2.10 above. There is no reason
why the GFC should have any discretion when no test criteria are
proposed. This is a poorly conceived section of the Forest Bill 2007.
Unlike the scrutiny of applicants for concessions, no checks are
proposed on applicants for afforestation agreements, nor are
obligations imposed, nor time limits set, nor provision for planning or
monitoring, etc. There should be explicit prohibition on clear-felling
or burning of forest (as defined in section 2) in order to create or
maintain the specified plants.

Section 13 (1) - change “The Commission may require . . . “ to “The
Commission shall require . . .”; see general point number 2.10 above.
There is no reason why the GFC should have any discretion when no test
criteria are proposed. In best practice, all holders of State Forest
authorisations should deposit a security bond. Criteria for the size
of the bond should be stated. The provision for a waiver in section 13
(2) should be justified. What sort of “exceptional circumstances” does
the GFC have in mind? What are the criteria for assessing an
application for a waiver? As a general rule, waivers should not be
granted when the original rationale is so sound. As in other cases of
GFC discretion, there should be provision for appeal by the applicant
against a negative decision.

Section 14 (1) (d) – “land that is lawfully occupied” is not defined.
Terminology should be that already found in the land laws of Guyana.

Section 14 (2) – see section 10 (1) above.

Sections 15 and 16 – should have been placed earlier in the structure
of the law, grouping eligibility clauses together. It is unclear why
the wording of section 16 is so convoluted compared with the much
simpler wording in section 15 in the February 2004 version. What is
important is the prevention of rentier behaviour (sub-letting) which
negates the principle of open tenders and bidding for rights to access
publicly-owned assets. This under-the-table consolidation of public
assets is nowhere sanctioned in law or policy in Guyana. Section 16
should be entirely simplified and re-written; excepting sub-sections
(6) – (8).

Section 18 – it is against natural justice for a government agency
(other than a public security agency) to be allowed to interrupt on
suspicion alone the activities of a private enterprise. This section
needs to incorporate safeguards against sloppy or vindictive government
actions. Safeguards should include provision for adequate and prompt
compensation in the event of wrongful suspicions.

Section 18 (2) – it is unclear why holders of larger concessions should
be allowed to remedy or rectify, but holders of smaller concessions are
denied this opportunity.

Section 18 (3) – criteria should be given for this exercise in GFC
judgement.

Section 19 – there must be safeguards against inequitable amendments
and any changes which are or could be negative with respect to
sustainable forest management.

Section 21 (2) - change “The Commission may . . . “ to “The Commission
shall . . .”; see general point number 2.10 above. There is no reason
why the GFC should have any discretion when no test criteria are
proposed.

Section 22 (1) – should be expanded to cover genetic resources and
environmental services generally (including habitat protection and
carbon sequestration).

Section 23 – it is unclear why the EPA (or the GFC) should be allowed
to make long-term decisions affecting use of specific lands without a
public enquiry and settlement process. The discretionary provision at
sub-section (2) (d) should be replaced by an obligation. Only reasons
of national security should allow the government to operate with
administrative discretion in reserving land or other public resources.

Section 23 (3) – it should not be the GFC which decides which documents
should be made available; that would be for the affected stakeholders
to decide. Moreover, it should be for the EPA to make documents
available, not the GFC.

Sections 23 (5), and 30 (3), and 31 (4) – what is the purpose of these
sub-sections? Presumably no person should breach any properly
promulgated government order, so why include these sub-sections?

Section 25 (3) – administrative discretion should be replaced by
challengeable criteria, with an appeals process as mentioned above for
all cases of non-mandatory action by the GFC.

Section 29 (2) – compensation should be paid according to labour laws,
not at the discretion of the GFC.

Section 30 – the GFC must publish challengeable criteria under which a
tree protection order shall be made. Sub-section (1) (b) (ii) should
mention timber and roots.

Sections 30 (2), and 31 (3) – challengeable criteria for exemptions
should replace this blanket authority for GFC discretion.

Section 30 (5) – does not make sense and should be deleted.

Section 31 – what is proposed here is effectively expropriation of
private property without prior independently-chaired public inquiry
into the justification. Much of the reasoning given in sub-section (2)
pertains to the EPA, not to the GFC. It would be more appropriate to
manage conservation on private land through the in-draft legislation on
the Guyana Protected Areas System. The provisions in the National
Constitution for expropriation of land should be used or referenced,
especially with reference to sub-section (6)..

Section 32 – there is ample international experience of managing risks
of disease and pestilence. The dictatorial provisions in this section,
with no requirement for public justification, appeal, or compensation
for wrongful interference with private property, should be replaced by
more conventional wording.

Section 33 (3) – does not make sense and should be deleted.

Section 34 (1) – what are the relevant international legal obligations?
– spell them out.

Section 34 (2) (b) – why is Kaieteur National Park mentioned but not
Iwokrama?

Section 35 –clumsy wording which appears to go through the motions of
public consultation but avoids dealing with the substance of a code of
practice. A pointless exercise, as currently worded. Best and common
international practice is to develop any such code in an open,
participatory forum in which the GFC does not dominate. There should
be transparent and reliable use of the GFC website in the development
of any such code, its promotion and its revision. Field testing should
include several rounds, and a diversity of geographic locations; test
design should counter Georgetown bias. Monitoring of the utility and
effect of the code, and provision for revision, should be built into
the law.

Section 35 (6) (b) – a code of practice having such legal force would
need to be phrased quite differently from the guideline approach used
in the sometimes-available on the GFC website of the Code of Practice
for Timber Harvesting (second edition, November 2002).

Section 35 (9) – this sub-section appears to say that Regulations and
Orders have higher legal force than a Code of Practice. What does this
mean?

Section 36 (2) – no regulations are annexed or presented to the
legislature in parallel with this draft Forest Bill 2007, so the effect
of this sub-section is unclear and consequently may have no legal
effect? If eligibility for a removal permit is demonstrated, the GFC
shall issue such a permit, and that obligation on the GFC should be
included in sub-section (2).

Section 37 – congratulations to the GFC. This clear wording should be
copied in other countries.

Section 42 – the same objections to the framing of section 35 on codes
of practice apply equally to section 42 on timber grading

Section 43 – importing countries and enterprises may choose to certify
forest produce from Guyana, or may be required to do so by national or
international trading rules, over which the Guyana National Bureau of
Standards could have no influence. As written, this section is
unenforceable.

Section 43 (2) – no criteria are mentioned by which the GNBS or the GFC
could assess for accreditation a conformity assessment body. The GFC
has no direct experience of international standards, how they are
developed or operated, and should not seem to legislate on such a
matter without gaining knowledge about the subject.

Section 44 – if there is no relevant or usable GNBS standard then no
forest produce can be exported from Guyana? Does the GNBS have a
standard for timber logs?

Section 45 – it is unclear how a prescribed body would determine “true
market value”. This section appears to be unwarranted government
interference in normal commercial practice, and is not in accordance
with best international practice. The performance of the FPMC so far
suggests that it would be incompetent in any such role. It is the
responsibility of the Customs Administration of the Guyana Revenue
Authority to detect and prevent under-invoicing, mis-declaration and
under-declaration of export goods. It is unclear why the GFC should
seek a parallel role.

Sections 46 and 47 – as elsewhere in the draft Forest Bill 2007,
sections on eligibility and applicability should come at the beginning
of the relevant Parts, not scattered or, as here, at the end of a Part.

Section 48 – the wording should be checked for overlap, duplication or
contradiction with the revised GFC Act 2007. Article 13 of the
National Constitution, on open governance, implies that all government
records should be open to the public unless there are
constitutionally-approved reasons (such as national security or
commercial confidentiality) why the records should not be open-access.
This section does not conform to such principles and should be revised.
Such assess will be required in any internationally-acceptable legality
assurance scheme.

Section 49 – as for section 48. Previous sections of this Act do not
refer to “the Commissioner”, so that reference should be deleted from
section 49 (a).

Section 49 (c) – is it constitutional to include such a vague but
threatening obligation in a forest law?

Sections 50 (3), and 55 (2) (c), and 57 (d), and 58 (2) – an official
receipt should be issued to the holder for any document taken, copied
or otherwise reproduced, or any thing seized by a forest officer.

Section 51 – this wording seems OK, but there should be provision for
appeal against a negative decision. The contents of section 51 should
be placed adjacent to section 48.

Part 6 – this Part should be checked against the revised GFC Act 2007.
All references in this Part to the Commissioner should be replaced by
reference only to the Commission (for example, in sections 58 (3) and
(5) (c), and section 65, and section 69, and section 81 (o)) unless
there is a grammatical reason for referring to the Commissioner. This
Part should provide for compensation for actions of the Commission or
its forest officers which are unlawful, malicious or vindictive, or
because of the negligent actions or inactions by the Commission or its
forest officers. Offended person should be able to claim if they can
demonstrate financial, material or other kinds of loss or distress from
such cause(s). Such compensation should include civil damages, and
payment of all legal costs incurred by the offended person in defence
of his/her case against the Commission or its forest officers. This
would be the natural justice equivalent of sections 58 (8) and 77 which
protect the forest officers of the GFC.

Presumably there are other laws in Guyana which provide for financial
and other recourse in the event of wrongful prosecution?

Section 52 – it is unclear what antique document has been used as a
source for this section, but it should be brought up to date by
inclusion of more modern methods of transport; including diesel-powered
tractors and trucks and trailers, tugboats, towed and self-powered
barges, cranes and container handling equipment. There is a redundant
quotation mark at the end of section 52.

Section 53 (4) (a) – it is unclear why GFC employment matters should be
treated specifically in the Forest Bill 2007 when they should fall
within general government or national employment legislation. Sacking
someone without having to give a reason is surely against other
Guyanese law?

Section 53 (5) – then to whom does the Commissioner surrender his
instrument of appointment? Why is any of section 53 in the Forest Bill
instead of in the GFC Act?

Section 54 (2) (b) – should include “State Forest authorisation”
alongside permit, licence, or certificate.

Section 56 – such entry is explicitly confined to the purpose of the
search prescribed in the warrant. Any other entry would be an act of
trespass.

Section 61 (1) (b) – this seems to be a highly intrusive requirement.
If an offence is suspected, then the GFC should charge the offender
under section 68 and present a court case. This section is an open
door to corruption.

Section 65 – the entirely internal investigation proposed in this
section is unlikely to satisfy any complainant, and does not accord
with best international practice; see general point 2.9 above.

Section 66 (3) – should go on to prescribe what happens to an arrested
person.

Section 67 – substantially and unnecessarily duplicates section 14.

Section 69 (3) and (4) – these provisions seem to be against natural
justice, and should be deleted.

Section 71 – the provision for compounding of offences is inadequately
circumscribed and liable to be an open door to corruption. The range
of offences which may be compounded should be prescribed in law,
penalties should be fixed (but subject to inflation by the official
cost of living index), two forest officers should sign and date the
prescribed form for each offence, the suspect may choose a court case
instead of accepting the offer to compound, one third of the fixed
compound fee shall be payable to the forest officer who detects the
offence which is subsequently admitted by the offender, etc. – there is
ample literature on the proper operation of compounding.

Section 74 (2) – interest rates should be determined and published by
the Minister of Finance.

Section 75 – if an application has been submitted in prescribed form,
and the applicant is eligible and conditions have been fully satisfied,
and if application fees have been paid, the applicant may sue the
Commission if a State Forest authorisation (or other kind of permit) is
not issued promptly.

Section 76 – provisions for blanket exemptions are liable to political
abuse and so deprecated in international best practice. If they offer
a defence against errors in drafting the legislation, the solution is
to amend the legislation, not to make exemptions which can appear to be
inequitable and perhaps open doors to corruption.

Section 79 (1) – what is the nature and purpose of such consultation?
This provision seems to be a weak defence of the rights of the GFC to
act as stewards of Guyana’s State Forest resources in the public
interest. It seems to parallel the curious provision for the GFC to
infringe the mandate of the EPA.

Section 80 (1) (3) – Guyana has traditionally charged very low royalty
rates for timber extracted from its natural forests. All, or almost
all, consultancy reports on Guyana’s forest revenues advocate that
there should be a much simplified system and that the intrinsic rent
should be captured for central government Consolidated Fund. The major
charge in State Forest authorisations should be that in section 80 (1)
(e), the area concession rental, to be paid directly into the
Consolidated Fund. The justification for royalty (section 80 (1) (d))
is weak. The proposal to pass this weakly justified charge to the
Consolidated Fund and to allow the GFC to retain all the other complex
maze of charges is contrary to repeated recommendations, and should not
be supported in the Forest Bill 2007.

Section 80 (1) (a) and (b) – application fees are intended to be used
for the administration of those applications. Where the GFC is not
using these fees for such purpose, but is instead adding such fees to a
pool of income, then applicants should have the right to reclaim those
fees; and to sue for mal-administration? In particular, the
application fees for State Forest authorisations are intended to cover
the costs of expert evaluation of the technical competence and
financial status of the applicants. There is no evidence that the GFC
have ever used such fees for the intended purpose.

Section 81 – the obligation on the Minister to act positively requires
the words “may make regulations” to be changed to “shall make
regulations”. No regulation, qualification or restriction, or
qualification or restriction in the regulations, shall change the
meaning or intention in the Act itself. In particular, the regulations
must prevent under-the-table transfers in effective managerial or
financial control of a State Forest authorisation. A holder becoming
technically or financially unable or unwilling to manage the authorised
area in accordance with the laws, regulations and specific terms of the
authorisation must surrender the authorisation forthwith, and that area
shall be returned to the strategic reserve of State Forest for
competitive allocation in accordance with the concession strategy
required by the National Forestry Policy 1997 and the National Forest
Plan 2001. This is to control the widespread abuse of the concession
system which the GFC has been unwilling or unable to control during the
last decade.

Section 81 (1) (d) – the criteria to be specified shall be applied, not
merely considered.

Section 81 (1) (h) – this section should also cover forest management
plans required under sections 8 (2) (a) and 12 (b).

Sections 81 (1) (k) and (l) – this has already been done through
sections 68 and 70. Why does it need to be repeated for the
regulations, instead of referring back to the Act itself?

Section 81 (1) (m) – duplicates requirements in section 50.

Section 81 (2) –should be covered by the regulation for measurement of
forest produce at section 81 (1) (j). And this regulation should cover
assessment of forest services, as well as forest goods.

Section 81 (3) – this section for arbitrary and discretionary
activities should be deleted, as contrary to international best
practice.

Section 82 (2) –What does this section mean?

Section 91 (2) – persons and organisations other than the GFC should
also have the right to make application to the High Court, in the same
kinds of circumstance.

Schedule 1 – to be checked by a lawyer for comparability with other law
in Guyana.

Schedule 2 – references to the Forests Act 2006 should be updated.

Schedule 2, Public Lands (Private Roads) Act, section 3 – what is the
purpose and legal significance of such consultation?

Schedule 2, Public Lands (Private Roads) Act, regulation 3 – section
numbers need to be updated.

Signatories:

Dated: 29 February 2008

Kaieteur News headline article, 28 February 2008

2008-03-01T06:43:00.001-08:00

Kaieteur News headline article, 28 February 2008

http://www.kaieteurnewsgy.com/

Bai Shan Lin now complying
with labour regulations
...transactions with Demerara Timbers not a sale
Minister of Agriculture, Robert Persaud, commenting on the Bai Shan Lin
fiasco, has said that following reports in the media about labour
infractions, he has requested that the Guyana Forestry Commission (GFC) work
with the Ministry of Labour to ensure compliance at the Chinese operated
sawmills.
Persaud reported that the company has submitted several reports to suggest
that it is now complying with the labour regulations. He added, however,
that the monitoring has to be ongoing.
Persaud noted that there have also been similar reports of infractions at
Barama Company Limited.
According to Persaud, he has instructed the relevant stakeholders to conduct
random, unannounced inspections to ensure 100 per cent compliance.
Previously, visits were conducted in a planned way thus allowing deviant
entities to prepare for the forestry officers and labour officials.
Kaieteur News was bombarded by complaints by local workers at the Bai Shan
Lin forestry operations at Coomaka, in Region Ten.
Workers at the Chinese-owned sawmill had unanimously complained about what
they called discrimination towards Guyanese workers and even called the
operation "a slave camp."
Earl Julian, site manager, commenting on workers' safety, had stated that
standards commonly implemented are not enforced.
During a tour of the site, Kaieteur News observed several workers operating
without the necessary safety gear that would be commonly in place in such a
hazardous environment.
Workers were observed working in slippers.
Female workers were also employed for the laborious task of stacking wood.
Each worker that spoke to any media operative at the time was extremely
cautious of the Chinese personnel seeing them talking to the media for fear
of losing their jobs.
A particularly disturbing practice was also observed; a notice was placed
for all to see that read: " It has been observed that Guyanese members of
staff have cultivated a habit of leaving the compound without notification
and authorization...With effect Monday 9th July all Guyanese member of staff
must obtain the relevant permission from management before leaving the
compound...Failure to do so will result in their immediate dismissal."
And according to Persaud, the report that he is in receipt of information
pertaining to the buyout of Demerara Timbers was inaccurate. He indicated
that it is neither a sale nor a transfer of concessions.
He stated that what was represented was more of a management support
alliance.
Following meetings with GFC and senior management of Demerara Timbers
Limited (DTL) and Bai Shan Lin (BSL), the companies pointed out that there
has been no sale and DTL is in 100 per cent control of its concession and
the logging operation.
According to Persaud, the entities stand fast in that there has been no
transfer of shares or assets to BSL.
He added that according to the information that has been presented to him,
DTL is contemplating getting into a value added aspect of business because
they lack the necessary expertise to develop the products or market them.
Kaieteur news understands that neither party has ruled out the option of a
complete or partial takeover sometime in future.
According to Persaud, there is nothing illegal about what was presented to
his office.
He did confirm, however, that Guyana does not own any shares in DTL hence
they would not have a say in any sale.
Persaud pointed out that in the event of a transfer of concession, then it
would have to gain the attention of his office given that they did not own
the land; rather it was leased.

The forestry commission's critics are now criticising it for enforcing standards

2008-02-25T08:04:00.000-08:00

http://www.stabroeknews.com/index.pl/article?id=56539693

The forestry commission's critics are now criticising it for enforcing
standards
Stabroek News, Saturday, February 23rd 2008

Dear Editor,

I would like to call attention to two letters captioned "The Industry
did not view the Forestry Commission's threats to curtail production as
credible" (08.02.16) by Mahadeo Kowlessar; and "The Forestry Commission
should focus on the huge losses suffered from log exports" (08.02.19)
by Janet Bulkan.

I actually delayed penning this letter, because based on the past
experience I was expecting a third letter by Seelochan Beharry to
follow closely on these initial two conforming to the pattern of their
continuing orchestrated attack on the Forestry Commission.

Let me deal firstly with Kowlessar's letter. In numerous press
releases, the GFC made it clear that May 2008 was the final date for
submission of inventory information - however inventory information
submitted prior to that date would be verified and only then approval
given for harvesting to occur. GFC made it abundantly clear that no
harvesting would be approved if inventory information was not provided.

What is the basis then for this gentleman to come to the assumption
that persons are being allowed to log in the absence of the 100 %
inventory submission?

Mr Kowlessar's statement that "the GFC's threats to curtail logging
were not viewed as credible" is laughable. Why would loggers who were
collectively fined two hundred and seventy-five million dollars
(G$275M) in 2007 not take the GFC seriously, and repeat the same error,
especially since according to the GFC, the penalties increase on the
second and third offences? This doesn't make sense, Mr Kowlessar.

The GFC stated clearly in one of their releases that the maximum
acreage harvestable in one calendar year was five hundred (500) blocks
for all concessionaires put together, or fifty thousand (50,000 ha)
hectares. How does Kowlessar arrive at 144,960 hectares? Where did he
get his misinformation from - or rather, is it his intention to
misinform? And when did GFC indicate that all of the blocks have to be
verified within the month of December. Is Kowlessar assuming
incorrectly that the loggers will log all of the blocks in January
2008?

No Mr Kowlessar, the intention as indicated by GFC is to verify some
blocks to allow harvesting in January 2008. Whilst the loggers are
operating in these blocks, the GFC teams continue to do verification.
Kowlessar needs to update himself more on forestry issues so that he
can offer constructive criticism, and not make it his duty to regularly
write negatively on the GFC to support some hidden agenda.

With respect to the letter by Ms Bulkan, she refers to the commission
the Guyana loses since Barama pays no export commission on the export
of greenheart logs. I suggest that this doctoral researcher gets her
facts right by referring to Article 8 B (Export tax) of the agreement
signed between the Guyana Government and Barama on 14th August 1991.
This article clearly states that Barama has to pay the export
commission on the export of greenheart logs.

Further reading of this agreement confirms what the GFC has been
stating all along- many agreements signed before 1992 give companies
unrestricted ability to export logs. Ms Bulkan also quotes how many
logs were exported in 2007( 157,097 cubic meters), but conveniently
omits that the export figures for 2006 were 190,783 cubic metres. This
means that even in the absence of a national log export policy, the GFC
was able to encourage concessionaires to export less logs in 2007, an
actual reduction of 33,686 cubic meters or a 17.66 % volume reduction.
Surely the GFC and producers need to be congratulated on this!

Bulkan however, in her haste to attack the GFC at every opportunity
misses this point. Her inconsistency is exposed by the fact that whilst
a few years ago she was quick to publicise the lack of standards and
quality in processing, now that the GFC is enforcing same after a long
period of consultation with the sector, she misguidedly tries to
portray the GFC as running after the processors. Yet, it is these same
processors who need to upgrade their equipment, standards, quality and
efficiency if they are to profitably process the logs that Bulkan wants
banned. This is a real dilemma for the GFC- in one instance the
doomsayers are upbraiding the GFC for not enforcing standards, quality
control etc. However, when GFC does begin the enforcement process
(after considerable dialogue with stakeholders), the Bulkans and
Kowlessars see it as a golden opportunity to try to discredit the GFC.

As a local consumer who has been forced to buy substandard forest
produce because of the limited quality produce readily available, and
as a Guyanese who has a stake in the patrimony of the forests, I say to
the GFC that it is time that the players in the forestry sector and
industry come on board. The GFC has been much too tolerant for too long
a period. I also say to you- ignore the Bulkans and Kowlessars who
obviously have agendas to satisfy.

Yours faithfully,

Samantha Griffith (Ms)

Is Guyana's logging deal in its best interests?

2008-02-22T09:29:00.000-08:00

Is Guyana's logging deal in its best interests?
Rhett A. Butler, mongabay.com
February 22, 2008

In January Guyana awarded U.S. timber firm Simon & Shock International
a 400,000-hectare (988,400-acre) logging concession near the Brazilian
border.

Final approval hinges on the completion of an environmental impact
survey and a tree inventory. While Simon & Shock International says it
plans to conduct selective logging, the firm has not announced whether
it will seek Forest Stewardship Council certification, a mark for
responsibly-harvested timber.

To date it is unclear how much Guyana will see from the rainforest
logging project. Initial reports indicated Simon & Shock International
would invest $26 million developing the concession, or about $65 per
hectare, but these are simply the firm's costs for assessment, building
logging infrastructure like roads and sawmills, government fees and
tax, and employing loggers. Other guidance may come from an earlier
deal signed between Conservation International (CI) and the Guyanese
government to lease timber rights to 80,000 hectares of rainforest
along the Essequibo River. Under that 2003 agreement, the government
collected $41,000 in "fees" ($0.52 per hectare) while CI kicked in
$46,000 for a timber inventory and $30,000 for training of rangers, and
$10,000 annually for community development projects, according to an
analysis published by Katherine Ellison in Renting Biodiversity. All
said, the CI deal was worth about $200,000 or $2.50 per hectare.

These numbers suggest that logging in Guyana is worth between $2.50
and $65 per hectare, though $65 is generous since assumes all of Simon
& Shock International's investment is staying in the country through
capital equipment purchases, employment, and taxes — an unlikely
scenario.

What are Guyana's other options?

Right now there are few — Guyana is the second poorest country in
South America. For some, the best option seems to be paving the
Georgetown-Lethem Road to the Brazilian city of Boa Vista, a
development that could potentially turn Guyana's forests into a vast
sea of sugar cane plantations to supply the booming market for
biofuels. Plantation development would spur more roads that could open
up Guyana's mostly untouched interior to logging and mining —
activities that would surely benefit some elements of Guyana's economy.

At the same time, clearing of Guyana's dense and carbon-rich forests
would release hundreds of millions of tons of carbon into the
atmosphere, contributing to the buildup of greenhouse gases that is
warming the planet. Further, extractive industries like logging and
mining are rarely sustainable, nor do they create a more egalitarian
economy. With violence already a concern in Guyana (two mass killings
this month alone), it would seem unlikely that further class
stratification would benefit Guyana. Finally by logging its forests,
Guyana would forgo the future possibility of collecting ecosystem
services payments and developing ecotourism and other sustainable
economic activities.

Is there an alternative that can improve the lot for the average
Guyanese? There may be. Last fall Guyana's President, Bharrat Jagdeo,
hinted at the potential of using the country's forests as a giant
carbon offset to counter climate change. While he has yet to see any
takers, the emergence of REDD (Reducing emissions from deforestation
and degradation) as a recognized mechanism for fighting climate change
at the December climate talks in Bali, means that carbon offsets may
well play an important part in the economic future of Guyana.

How would it work?

Because Guyana has a low rate of deforestation, it is an atypical
example of a country that would qualify for REDD. Still because forests
has been concessioned for logging, these lands may be candidates for
compensation as REDD projects. Taking the Simon & Shock International
concession as an example, one could make the case that REDD could offer
competitive returns relative to logging. Here's a look.

Returns from logging

Simon & Shock International plans to log 400,000 hectares over a
30-year period, or roughly 13,333 hectares per year assuming a single
harvest (multiple harvests are likely, increasing the average area
harvested annually). Based on the CI case study, the Guyanese
government can expect to see a paltry $6500 per year in concession fees
(surely more would come from taxes on log processing and exports).
Using estimates from adjacent regions in the Amazon basin, Simon &
Shock International could expect to see revenue in the range of
$300-1000 per hectare, or $4-$13.3 million per year.

Returns from carbon

Aboveground live biomass (AGLB) class map of terra firme old growth
forests derived from the decision rule classifier and multiple layers
of remote sensing data. Â© Sassan Saatchi et al (2007) Global Change
Biology.
Guyana's forests are particular carbon-dense. Remote sensing data from
Caltech, the Woods Hole Institute, and Brazil's INPE suggests Guyana's
forests store 250 to more than 400 tons of above-ground biomass carbon
per hectare. Selectively logged forest sequesters significantly less —
on the order of 50 percent the amount of carbon stored in intact
forest, according to Lasco 2005.

Conservatively assuming that Simon & Shock International's selective
logging reduces the carbon stock from 250 tons per hectare to 150 tons
per hectare, harvesting of 13,333 hectares per year would release 1.3
million tons of carbon or about 4.9 million tons of carbon dioxide per
year. Should these emissions be avoided — under a scenario whereby the
concession instead qualifies as a REDD project, for example — Guyana
would be able to see these credits on the international carbon market.
Though the market does not yet exist in an official capacity, a deal
signed last month in Aceh, Indonesia established a price floor for such
credits of around $3.00 per ton of CO2 ($11 per ton of carbon), a price
that will likely increase for high quality REDD projects. As such, the
concession would see $14.3 million in annual revenue from the sale of
carbon credits. After implementation and operational costs, even a
small government tax rate would easily exceed the $6500 seen from
logging.

Conclusion: REDD is a viable economic alternative to logging

These quick calculations suggest that under a qualifying REDD regime,
preserving forests for carbon credits could offer Guyana favorable
economic returns relative to logging. Further, maintaining forest cover
provides Guyana option values, including the possibility of sustainably
developing forests (ecotourism, non-wood forest products) and taking
advantage of ecosystem services payments as they develop. REDD may be
prove to be a wise course for Guyana.

Compensation for logging transgressions allowable under the law - Forestry Commissioner

2008-02-22T09:26:00.000-08:00

http://www.stabroeknews.com/index.pl/article?id=56539620

Compensation for logging transgressions allowable under the law
â€¦Forestry Commissioner
Stabroek News, Business Supplement, Friday, February 22nd 2008

Forestry Commissioner James Singh

The monetary penalties imposed on a number of delinquent loggers by the
Guyana Forestry Commission (GFC) are permissible under existing
forestry legislation and fall within the regulations of the Commission
and operators in the country's forestry sector are well aware of those
regulations, according to GFC Commissioner James Singh.

Singh was at the time responding to queries raised by a Forest
Producers Asso-ciation (FPA) source and reported in the February 15
issue of the Stabroek Business regarding the authority of the GFC to
impose the monetary penalties. The source told Stabroek Business that
there was nothing in the current legislation that guided the specific
monetary penalty imposed by the GFC.

However, Singh drew attention to existing forestry legislation which
allows "the Minister or forest officers authorised by the Minister" to
accept compensation for transgression of forestry regulations.

Last week Stabroek Business was informed by the FPA source that loggers
might move to the courts to challenge the imposition of the penalties
on the grounds that existing legislation made no provision for such
penalties. However, Singh explained that the penalties should not be
regarded as fines in the legal sense of the term but as compensatory
payments to the GFC under regulations that had previously been
discussed with the FPA and which had been approved by the Office of the
Auditor General.

According to Singh the regulations allowed the GFC to extract - in the
case of a first offence - compensation equivalent to one sixth of the
value of logs harvested under conditions that transgressed GFC
regulations. In the case of the second offence delinquent loggers were
liable for compensation equivalent to 35 per cent of the harvested
timber while the third offence carried a penalty of seizure of all
harvested timber.

Value added: Locally manufactired wooden furniture

Singh said that the imposition of compensatory payments, even at the 35
per cent, second offence rate, still allowed the delinquent loggers to
make a profit after the sale of the harvested timber.

Singh told Stabroek Business that the Commission had previously
overlooked transgressions by some logging companies and that the
current compensation demand of one sixth of the value of harvested
timber had taken no account of transgressions committed prior to 2007.

Under GFC regulations which have been in place since 2005 loggers are
required to submit to the Commission five-year forestry management
plans as well as annual operational plans for their concessions. Singh
explained that the twofold purpose of these plans was first, to ensure
the availability of harvested timber to meet market demands and,
secondly, to monitor industry adherence to the Commission's
sustainability forestry programme. Singh said that even in cases where
such plans were submitted the Commission was, in some instances,
unhappy with the submissions.

According to Singh vetting exercises carried out by the GFC last year
have revealed that some loggers were harvesting logs in excess of the
amounts stated on their annual operational plans as well as in blocks
of forest from which they had not received permission to harvest logs
by the GFC.

He said that the Commission had previously acceded to requests from
the industry for "more time" to comply with the regulations. According
to Singh in 2006 the Commission had "called in" loggers and had made
available technical officers to assist with the preparation and
submission of these plans. He added that information regarding the
submission of the documentation was also available on the Commission's
website and that at this stage there was "absolutely no justification"
for failure to comply with the requirements.

"We believe that we have made more than enough concessions and granted
the industry sufficient time to comply with the regulations and a point
had been reached where we felt that action had to be taken to
demonstrate that the Commission was serious about enforcing its
regulations."

Meanwhile Singh disclosed that a number of loggers are yet to submit
their 2008 annual forestry plans which were due since November last
year. He said that the Commission had once again decided to demonstrate
a degree of flexibility with the sector by extending the submission
period to May this year but had also decided that delinquent loggers
would not be allowed to harvest timber until their operating plans for
the current year were submitted.

GFC officials have previously told Stabroek Business that the industry
is constrained by financial problems that militate against enhancing
the efficiency of the sector. However, Singh told this newspaper that
modern forestry practices demanded that operators in the industry
"retool" their operations.

And according to Singh the GFC has moved to ensure even tighter
scrutiny of logging operations to monitor compliance with its
regulations by recruiting 50 additional staff to keep track of logging
procedures.

Guyana boasts 13.8 million hectares of forested area of which around 50
per cent has been allocated for timber harvesting.

The forestry commission should focus on the huge losses suffered from log exports

2008-02-20T11:33:00.000-08:00

http://www.stabroeknews.com/index.pl/article?id=56539376

The forestry commission should focus on the huge losses suffered from
log exports
Stabroek News, Tuesday, February 19th 2008

Dear Editor,

It is just a year since 350 stakeholders at the public consultation on
a log export policy convened by the Guyana Forestry Commission (GFC)
endorsed overwhelmingly the replacement of log exports by local timber
processing.

This agreement tallies with the national development strategy
2001-2010, national forest policy (1997), national forest plan (2001)
and PPP pre-election manifesto (2006). Since that public consultation
on February 17, 2007, the GFC has made no public move to phase in bans
on exports of any logs, despite assurances given by Minister Robert
Persaud that "within 4 weeks the policy recommendation [would] be
tabled at Cabinet for members' consideration" (GFC. National Log Export
Policy. Post Consultation Summary, March 2007). Instead, the GFC is
chasing mills and lumber yards over matters for which it appears to
have neither full legal mandate nor legitimate means of effective
enforcement ("The Forestry Commission seems to be making a long overdue
attempt to restore its operational mandate", SN letter, February 8,
2008). And the GFC has yet to publish a technical justification for its
detailed specification to mills and lumber yards.

Meanwhile, what has Guyana been losing through this persistent failure
to implement national policy? According to the GFC's own figures,
157,000 m3 of logs were exported in calendar year 2007 with a declared
FOB value of US$ 20.8 million. Almost one-third of the logs were
greenheart: 46,000 m3, mostly to India at an average declared FOB value
of US$ 110 per m3. If the 2 per cent export commission had been paid on
all that greenheart, Guyana would have gained US$ 102,000. But as
Barama is by far the largest log exporter, in its own name and through
subsidiaries, Guyana loses the 2 per cent export commission because
Barama through its secret Foreign Direct Investment agreement is exempt
from this tax. By way of comparison, the export commission on logs in
Suriname is 20 per cent.

In addition, 14,000 m3 of greenheart piles were exported mainly to the
USA with FOB value of US$ 2.7 million, at an average of US$ 193 per m3.
Those piles made up 30 per cent of the exported greenheart log volumes,
but have earned Guyana US$55,000 in export commission mostly through
locally-owned producer companies, versus zero on the logs shipped by
and through Barama to India and China.

Using the value multipliers for furniture from the log price at mill
gate, which I estimated last year ("New colonial masters, Malaysian
loggers in South America: how under-valuation of forest resources
exposes Guyana to unscrupulous exploitation". CFA News (Commonwealth
Forestry Association) 9 (3) issue 38:1-2,11-13), the 157,000 m3 of
exported logs could have produced furniture with FOB export prices
ranging from US$125.1 million (multiplier 9.0) up to US$203.0 million
(multiplier 14.6), a ten-fold improvement over the declared log export
values. Instead of which, it is likely that the 95 per cent of logs
exported to China and India will have generated illegal and undeclared
profits of around US$47.8 million (at US$ 320 per m3 in "Available data
strongly suggest that the invoice prices for logs don't reflect market
value" (SN letter November 30, 2006).

Mr Editor, would it not be better if the GFC focused its attention
where Guyana is losing serious money, through the uncontrolled log
exports which are against all national policies, instead of chasing
lumber yards and small-scale loggers?

Yours faithfully, Janette Bulkan

The industry did not view the Forestry Commission's threats to curtail production as credible

2008-02-16T12:27:00.000-08:00

http://www.stabroeknews.com/index.pl/article?id=56539176
The industry did not view the Forestry Commission's threats to curtail
production as credible
Stabroek News, Saturday, February 16th 2008

Dear Editor,

The Guyana Forestry Commission (GFC) and the Minister for Forestry have
expressed disappointment at the poor response from the forest industry
to a timed series of reminders about documents to be submitted for 2008
licensing.

We do not know how many sawmills and other processors of forest
products have failed to provide the documents, but the GFC has given
data on the response from the medium- and large-scale loggers.

In January 2008, the GFC recorded 28 long-term large-scale Timber Sales
Agreements (TSAs) and 5 medium-term medium-scale Wood Cutting Leases
(WCLs).

Of the 28 TSAs, 9 had officially expired in December 2007, presumably
those originally issued to citizens of Guyana in 1985. Only 2 of those
9 had submitted adequate documents as requests for renewal by January
2008. Leaving aside those older TSAs, there are now 24 active TSAs and
WCLs.

All of these 24 concessions should have submitted annual operation
plans with associated detailed tree counts (100 per cent inventories of
commercial trees) for the areas to be harvested in the following year.

The concessionaires were reminded of this obligation in 2006, for the
2007 harvest year, they did not comply, and the GFC did not prevent
continued logging.

They were reminded again in September 2007. Only 17 of the 24
concessions supplied their annual operation plans and only 5 of the 24
supplied inventory data.

But while 302 blocks of inventory data should have been submitted by
these 5 loggers, only 144 blocks reached the GFC HQ, and 133 of these
144 came in January rather than before the end of the previous
November.

Why did the major loggers, who have over 4.4 million of the 6.2 million
hectares allocated for harvesting in State Forests, mostly ignore the
GFC advice and instructions? Why also were these major operators
allowed an extension until May 2008 for submission of the outstanding
forest inventory data, meanwhile being allowed to continue logging even
though they are still massively indebted to the GFC for taxes and
penalties?

One reason may be that the GFC's threats to curtail logging were not
viewed as credible. After all, the GFC has been ignored by the major
loggers with impunity for years until the penalties levied on
Presidential instruction in late 2007. Why is the GFC viewed as not
credible?

Inventory data on commercial trees in the following year's harvest
areas should be submitted by the end of November in the previous year.
The GFC allows itself just one month to check and approve those data.
As December is not a full working month for government agencies in
Guyana, this is quite a self-imposed challenge.

Here is the calculation - 5 loggers should have submitted data on 302
blocks each of 100 hectares. If all 24 active concessions had submitted
data in the same proportion, that would have meant (24 concessions x
302 blocks x 100 hectares / 5 concessions =) 144,960 hectares to be
checked. From the pilot inventory exercise in 2000, the GFC indicates
2.5 per cent sample as a consistency check and a work rate of 10
hectares per day. 2.5 per cent of 145,000 hectares is 3624 hectares. So
20 crews working flat out for 18 days at 10 hectares per crew per day
would be needed to make even this low percentage check for all the
concessions. The GFC does not have such capacity, and the concession
holders know this very well.

In chapter four of Lewis Carroll's "Alice through the looking glass",
Tweedledum says to Alice,

"If you think we're wax-works,

You ought to pay, you know.

Wax-works weren't made to be looked at

for nothing. Nohow."

And perhaps that is the problem in Guyana.

Yours faithfully,

Mahadeo Kowlessar