Curbing Illegal Logging

If we are to counter the accelerating global biodiversity crisis, protecting the richest and the largest areas of undamaged nature should be among our highest priorities. Tropical forests contain an estimated 80% of terrestrial biodiversity, much of it undocumented, and their wholesale degradation or conversion into pastures or cropland must be reduced and, as soon as possible, eliminated altogether. Since the signing of the Paris Agreement in 2015, various efforts at curbing unsanctioned deforestation have been attempted but, as rates of destruction continue to rise, current methods have clearly failed. Initial efforts by the new Brazilian Government to remove illegal goldminers from Indigenous Reserves in the Amazon are apparently making progress, but forest loss as a whole continues unabated, here and many places elsewhere.

Covered forest canopy, filtering light, and maintaining a stable microclimate. Image by stokpic from Pixabay

Illegal logging could be recognised as the ‘keystone species’ of forest destruction – everything depends on the first intrusions into virgin forest. The removal of the biggest trees, collateral damage to the standing vegetation, the obstruction of watercourses, and the erosion of soil from badly made logging roads all contribute to a downward spiral. When surfaced roads follow, settlers move in, especially goldminers, soy farmers, and cattle-raisers, and pollution increases. All too often these newly opened areas are actually within supposedly protected areas, including indigenous reserves. Land ownership and supposed legal protections are ignored by illegal loggers and miners whose activities often only come to light when a great deal of damage has already been done. The forest becomes fragmented, and many parcels then become too small to maintain populations of animals that require a large hunting/foraging range – typically the top predators on whom the whole ecosystem depends. As many studies have shown the removal of top predators results in various problems such as numbers of herbivores (plant-eaters) increasing, resulting in overgrazing, and these effects can lead to destabilisation of the whole ecosystem.

There are other damaging effects; even single roads in virgin forest can have alarming effects like cutting off both small mammals and insects from particular tree species, prey or habitat. Roads produce unshaded gashes through a forest that scare prey species by the lack of cover. The direct sun results in daytime temperatures that are too high for some flying insects, so for example day-flying pollinators are unable to reach their target trees. One of those affected is  the Brazil nut tree (Bertholletia excelsa) which only succeeds in undisturbed forest due to its reliance on particular forest bee. Furthermore, its seeds are dispersed by agoutis (the only animals capable of cracking the hard exterior of the capsule within which the nuts are found) which also shun such open areas.

Amazon timber truck and road in bright sunlight due to destruction of the canopy. Copyright Chico Batata – Greenpeace

Illegally logging virgin forests is extremely lucrative – so long as the timber can be sold. Reducing (and eventually eliminating) this trade should be mandatory, but as a recent report  in Law, Supply Chain and Sustainability has shown, sales of illegal timber continue at record levels. Too few governments regard suppressing illegal timber with sufficient urgency and official initiatives are often half-hearted or unconvincing. Some years ago the Governments of both United Kingdom and the Netherlands established strict procurement policies to eliminate illegal timber, but both have allowed these to falter, probably due to commercial lobbying. In Thailand a complete ban on commercial logging was instituted in 1989 and remains still in force, as discussed in my film Greening of Thailand. Unfortunately, Thai forests had already been decimated; today there is virtually no primary forest left to cut outside the National Parks. The main result has been effectively to export forest destruction to surrounding countries, particularly Myanmar and Cambodia.  

It is over thirty years since I reported for Channel Four News in the UK on the clear-felling of virgin forests with their unique flora and fauna, which I had witnessed in the Solomon Islands. Ignoring native land rights, the Solomons Forest Code and vigorous local opposition I witnessed the timber subsidiary of Hyundai Heavy Industries laying waste to vast swathes of these forested islands. Local landowners that I interviewed pointed to devastated land where their forest once stood, pollution of watercourses, major erosion, and landslips caused by logging roads, all contravening Solomons law. With suspected corruption of politicians and government officials failing to put a brake on it, there seemed nothing to stop the mayhem and the disappearance of great unique forests.

Illegal mining site in the Amazon. Copyright Marizilda Cruppe – Greenpeace

There was international pressure even then, and at the time of my report the international Timber Trade Organisation was claiming that the industry had reformed and that by the year 2000 all tropical timber would come from ‘sustainably managed sources’. Subsequent events have proved otherwise; the idea proved to be nothing more than fanciful hope, fairly typical of uncosted and hypothetical environmental targets that are promoted without serious action plans or genuine commitment by relevant authorities. Weak and corrupt governments have contributed, while corporate backing for illegal deforestation and land conversion continues with impunity. Clearly something has to change; could another approach make a difference?

A recent investigation by Greenpeace Brazil revealed that, of the heavy machinery involved in what they term ‘accelerating (forest) destruction (associated with) illegal mining’, the most popular brand was Hyundai Brazil –  the local subsidiary of Hyundai Heavy Industries of South Korea. Hyundai Brazil also produce what are claimed to be ‘the world’s best-selling chainsaws’ – many of which are assembled at Hyundai plants in Brazil. Like several other international corporations Hyundai uses marketing strategies that are geared towards frontiersmen, and they provide local backup in the form of servicing and repairs in remote provinces with no questions asked about where they are being used. It all encourages the destruction of local forests.

Indigenous demonstrator protesting against Hyundai vehicle-caused defortestation. Copyright Tuane Fernandes – Greenpeace

As a result of their investigation, Greenpeace Brazil contacted Hyundai Brazil and pointed out that being identified with illegal activities on a large scale might not be good for their company profile. Their earthmoving vehicles were too obvious to hide. To their surprise, representatives of the company agreed to meet with Greenpeace, and when the implications of their business were pointed out an extraordinary thing happened: Hyundai agreed to curb their activities in the provinces concerned, halting sales of  the vehicles and winding up their servicing business.

In the Solomon Islands thirty years ago I found Hyundai was oblivious to the damage they were causing; at the time I met the head of their operations, in the capital Honiara. He dismissed my complaints out of hand, clear-felling was standard industry practice and anyway there was plenty more forest left; he even denied that any laws were being broken – local land ownership was ‘disputed’. A forestry official told me that like every timber company in the territory Hyundai was involved in one-sided disputes with local landowners, few of whom had the resources to contest the cases. He told me: ‘international logging companies that come here have the resources to corrupt the entire political system from village chiefs to the cabinet’. Thirty years later it is perhaps surprising that there is any standing forest left; clear-felling results in the total destruction of the forest. Surprisingly perhaps there are still major tracts of intact primary forest in the Solomons – which Hyundai and others continue destroying even today – exporting the timber to China. Unfortunately, the process initiated by Greenpeace Brazil doesn’t seem to have filtered through to Hyundai headquarters or out to their Pacific operations. Various reports make clear these operations are of dubious legality and completely unsustainable as a harvesting method. The PR material on the main Hyundai website claim the company aspires to ‘pursuing safe and eco-friendly management’, ‘minimising environmental pollution’ and offering ‘green leadership’. This may all be a bit optimistic but at least a start has been made, if only in Brazil.  

Local landowner surveying damage, Solomon Islands. Copyright Edward Milner – ACACIA Productions

What all this set me thinking was that by using the right techniques it might be possible to persuade some of these corporates to change track and even live up to some of their own hype/rhetoric. Clearly, in Brazil Hyundai didn’t want to be known as the illegal loggers’ favourite bulldozer supplier, so perhaps chainsaw manufacturers could be similarly pressurised? I have looked at the websites of several of the main manufacturers and you would never believe that their products were involved in the business of destroying the planet. Take STIHL for example; makers of the world’s best-selling chainsaws.  

Like Hyundai, STIHL has an assembly plant in Brazil, and they sell large numbers of saws throughout South America. From the details on their website, you would think they were most concerned about their green credentials, and certainly wouldn’t want to be associated with clear-felling virgin forests. ‘STIHL sets out the guidelines for the company’s actions to protect the climate in the short, medium, and long term… We are dedicated to protecting ecosystems… we take an ambitious approach and set standards in our industry in order to help it achieve the Sustainable Development Goals of the United Nations’. This is a serious ambition, and tying themselves to protecting Earth and the UN objectives should cause them to be concerned about the uses to which their products are put. Maybe STIHL, or even Hyundai, take precautions to ensure that their chainsaws are not sold to illegal loggers; if so, no-one has heard of it. But if sales and servicing of earthmoving  vehicles can be restricted, why not chainsaws? If the right pressure was put on these companies, perhaps their whole support structure for illegal logging could be called into question. Another idea would be to license such equipment for use only within limited areas, not including protected zones. So what steps are these corporate giants actually taking to discourage the use of their machinery for illegal purposes? It would certainly be interesting to ask them, as I intend to do so and hope to report about later.

Planetary Health Weekly: Biodiversity Blog 15 – by Edward Milner (views my own)

N.B. First published in Planetary Health Weekly, a free weekly blog about the health of the planet.