Laman Webantu KM2A1: 3767 File Size: 6.9 Kb * |
TJ KB ECON: Pembalak Rakus By The Economist 10/2/2001 8:02 pm Sat |
TERJEMAHAN RINGKAS Malaysia adalah antara negara yang kununnya bercakap menjaga balak
dan hutan tetapi itu semua retorik untuk menipu rakyat dan pasaran.
Balak dan perabut menyumbang RM1.7 bilion ekspot negara, dimana
negara merupakan antara pengekdpot kayu keras (hardwood) terbesar
di dunia. Tetapi ini mengorbankan 1,560 batu persegi pohon-pohon yang rendang
menghiasi alam setiap tahun. Walaupun 1/3 negara masih dilitupi
hutan, kadar penebangan yang dikatakan 'terkawal' itu akan
membotakkan negara juga satu masa nanti. Lagipun Malaysia tidak
berminat untuk menerima pakai piagam antarabangsa dalam menguruskan
hutan. Nasib orang asli langsung tidak diperdulikan - malah mereka
dinyahkan atau dibunuh dengan sewenang-wenang demi balak yang
lebih menguntungkan. Di Sarawak, jenayah itu sengaja dibiar menular
dan merosakkan alam dan manusia kerana ada dalang di dalam parti
yang memerintah kerajaan. Keuntungan dari balak itu juga digunakan
untuk menyogok rasuah kepada pemimpin - kerana merekalah yang
memilih dan memberi kawasan untuk dinodai dengan syarat ganjaran
diperolehi. Kini kerajaan seperti mahu mengikut piagam Forest Stewardship Council
(FSC) - satu piagam yang menjadi syarat untuk balak dapat memnembusi
pasaran Eropah, Amerika Latin dan Amerika Utara. Ini memeranjatkan
aktivis pecinta alam dan hak kemanusiaan. Bolehkah kita percaya semua
ini? KOMEN Saya ingin mengajak pembaca mengimbau beberapa pendedahan KM2 yang
lepas-lepas. b. Dalang Balak Tanam Pokok Pula
Disana terserlah DUA lapuran GreenPeace betapa intimnya jalinan politik untuk menodai hutan di Sarawak yang didalangi oleh kroni yang sudah tidak asing lagi:
-Kapal Berita- From The Economist Good fellers Jan 25th 2001 LOGGING in South-East Asia is often a criminal affair. Illegal fellers
have denuded much of Indonesia, and Myanmar's army, using slaves, is
fast cutting down that country's tropical trees. In Cambodia and Laos,
both rebels and soldiers have been felling trees for years, leaving
land bare and vulnerable to erosion and flooding. In Vietnam, where
the timber industry appears to be better controlled, illegal loggers
nevertheless still flourish. And Thai monks have become so desperate
to protect their country's few surviving trees that they wrap saffron
robes on the trunks as a blessing. Malaysia has long promoted itself as the big exception in the region.
The government talks of 'sustainable logging': chopping down only as
many trees as can be felled without endangering the survival of its
forests. Timber and furniture industries provide jobs, tax revenue
and, for loggers, political influence. Last year the country produced
22m cubic metres of sawn logs, earning M$1.7 billion ($450m) from
exports. It sells more tropical logs and sawn tropical timber abroad
than any other country, and is one of the biggest exporters of
hardwood. Domestic demand for wood, especially furniture, grew by 12%
last year. Yet all this means an annual net loss of perhaps 400,000 hectares
(1,560 square miles) of trees, between 1% and 2% of Malaysia's forest
cover, says the Food and Agriculture Organisation, though it admits
exact measurements are hard to get. Even though a third of the country
is covered by virgin or planted forest, the rate of felling is
high-and not in the long term sustainable. Worse, in the eyes of
western campaigners, Malaysia has refused to adopt international
standards on managing forests. Greedy loggers in Malaysia are accused
of ignoring the interests of indigenous people who live in the
forests. In Sarawak, one of the largest timber-producing states,
activists say locals have been displaced or even killed by loggers.
Forest nomads are losing their way of life, fish stocks have dwindled
as topsoil has been washed into rivers, and wood is denied to those
who want to build houses and boats, says Forests Monitor, an
environmental group. It also says profits from timber help to fuel
corruption as loggers help to finance local ruling parties, which in
turn allocate areas to be felled. "Sarawak is a flashpoint of bad
forest practice," says another observer of the timber industry.
Now, however, the national government seems ready to adopt standards
set by the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC). These are used, mainly in
Europe, Latin America and North America, to certify that timber comes
from well-managed forests. In December the government and 200
representatives of indigenous and other groups agreed that the whole
industry should be certified. That means giving a voice to local
communities and ensuring that trees are planted as well as felled.
Activists who came from Sarawak said they were surprised even to be
allowed to attend the meeting (in the past their passports have been
snatched and lawyers forbidden to meet them), let alone to reach an
agreement. So why has Malaysia's prickly prime minister, Mahathir Mohamad, ever a
proud opponent of western values, agreed to a scheme devised by green
groups such as the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF), and the Tropical
Forest Trust, which is financed by European furniture shops? He may
have realised at last that being green pays well. Malaysia sells much
wood in China and Japan, where buyers do not care about its history,
but the most valuable markets are in the West. There, consumers want
to believe their wood has not come to them at the expense of the
environment and will pay as much as 50% more for certified stuff. That
may mean as much as $1,000 for a cubic metre of tropical wood, says
Steve Howard of WWF. Forests Monitor is still sceptical that Sarawak, which has few trees
left but large deposits of oil, will ever benefit. But for some
Malaysian forests, such as one of 100,000 hectares in Sabah, which
have already met FSC-standards, lucrative sales should be pending.
Other states, take note. http://www.economist.com |