In March 2007, FSC-watch posted the ‘verdict’ of the Peoples’ Permanent Tribunal on the company Pizano SA, which had been FSC certified by SmartWood. The Peoples’ Permanent Tribunal had been investigating the environmental and social impacts of companies in Colombia. Here’s some more information about this FSC-certified company from Miguel Ángel Soto, Greenpeace Spain, and Tom Kuchartz, Ecologistas en Acción. This article was published in the World Rainforest Movement Bulletin 123, October 2007:
Author: Chris Lang
SmartWood issues another controversial certificate to Tembec
The FSC certification of large-scale industrial logging operations continues. A year ago, FSC-watch posted a critique of the certification of Tembec’s logging operations in Canada.
Stop GE Trees Campaign seeks clarification of FSC’s position on GM trees
Following FSC-Watch’s post questioning FSC’s position on genetically modified trees, (and an article in the World Rainforest Movement Bulletin), the Stop GE Trees Campaign has written to Heiko Liedeker requesting clarification. Copies of the letter have also been sent to FSC’s Board and to Andre de Freitas, FSC’s Head of Policy and Standards. (I wrote to de Freitas on 23 August 2007, requesting a clarification of FSC’s position on GM trees. De Freitas did not reply.)
The people or the paper industry?
Press release from Geasphere, South Africa:
Veracel certification would be yet another disaster for FSC
Press release from World Rainforest Movement, 17 September 2007:
What, exactly, is FSC’s position on GM trees?
“Use of genetically modified organisms shall be prohibited,” states Criterion 6.8 of FSC’s Principles and Criteria. That appears to be clear. Strictly interpreted this would mean that a company carrying out laboratory research into GE trees (and/or financing such research) should not be certified under the FSC system, because that would involve the use of genetically modified organisms. Unfortunately, but perhaps not surprisingly, FSC’s Certification Bodies (assessors) don’t take such a strict interpretation of criterion 6.8.
FSC-certified plantations suck Sudwala caves dry
Philip Owen of Geasphere in South Africa circulated this statement and article about the impacts of Sappi’s FSC-certified plantations on the water flow in the Sudwala Caves.
Zurich fails to specify FSC – does this mean Raubbau?
Last week, an interesting article appeared in the Swiss newspaper, the Tagesanzeiger. FC Zurich has just opened a new stadium, called the Letzigrund. The city promised an ecological stadium, but the wood used is not FSC certified. WWF claims that without an FSC certificate, there is no guarantee that the wood doesn’t come from destructive operations (“Raubbau” in German).
Veracel: A test case for the FSC
This month’s WRM Bulletin includes an editorial about FSC’s certification of industrial tree plantations and two articles about the assessment of Veracel, which is currently being carried out by SGS. The editorial and the two articles are reproduced in full below:
Swaziland: FSC credibility hits all time low with certification of Sappi
In November 2004, on a visit to Swaziland with Wally Menne of TimberWatch, I saw the destruction caused by fifty years of industrial forestry “development”. Many of the plantations were established under a British “aid” programme run by the Colonial Development Corporation (now called CDC Group – a private equity company whose sole shareholder is the UK Department for International Development).
FSC-Watch 