re-forestation in Malaysia...you can join in!

I wish you success!

We have tried similar things on a very small local scale which met with very limited success.

I an a land manager for a land trust; we preserve natural habitat and agricultural lands. We also perform environmental restoration.

 

Very interesting post Simon. But I wonder just what is wrong with the citizens of Malasia RE Foresting thier own forest which from what you hint at, they apparently destroyed some portion or all of it. People from all over the World must respect the beautiful world that has been given to us. Each of us on our own must be aware of our responsibility to nurture our immediate local. Now should the population of Maylasia have endured some catastrophe, such as a sunami, earthquake, then the USA and the UK are among the first to assist. But, trees, really Simon. Instead of destroying valuble jungle, this land should be put to good use by growing valuble and scarce lumber to be used as a marketable item. This would encourage vast resources to be opened up for the Malaysian people. I doubt the average Malaysian gets too excited about some middleclass tourist visiting his tree. :cheer2:

 

Congratulations! Americans taking care of America. :cheer2:

 

Welcome to PriusChat Mr. Twichett. For more information about this work, are there other web resources than

http://hknconsult.weebly.com/carbon-offset-schemes.html

With additional details perhaps?

Second, and just from my curiosity, I wonder if HKN is involved in television advertising to stimulate tourism in Malaysia. I have seen many such ads recently on English-language television in China (CCTV news).

 

Palm oil is probably the cheapest feed for biodiesel, bordering on equal cost to conventional diesel. Assuming this is driving force for the deforestation?

 

I am interested in Simon Twitchett's perspective here as well, as his boots are on the ground.

Broadly, across SE Asia, deforestation is driven by three factors. Pulp demand for paper in Japan and China. Near to the equator, oil-palm plantations. Further from the equator, rubber-tree plantations. The latter two yield products with very high current market values.

In countries with relatively narrow revenue streams, it is no simple matter to convince people to leave forested land alone.

 

Hello Tochatihu, Thankyou for your post. You always have something valuble and worthwhile to say. I too would be interested in Simon's endeavor. However after researching Palmoil in Malaysia, I find that this is a multi-billion business and employs hundreds of thousands of Malaysians. All of this land burning and redevelopement of thousands of acres was done with the full approval and enthusiasm of the Malaysian Government. What is needed is a full revolution by the Malaysian people themselves. However that is unlikely. But as you say this sort of rape is happening in many areas of the world to the gratification of the big land owners and other con artist, Official and non-official. Simons concept as so far presented is verry pretty, but limp.

:cheer2:

 

Hey wait, I didn't say rape. Everybody needs money. If I happen to control a tropical land area and am poor, I am going to listen to people to present profitable land-conversion ideas to me. Who would not?

Could I do better with REDD+, or Twitchett's, or with ecotourism? I'd only think so if somebody shows me a better business plan.

I am the last person to say that poor people, controlling land rights, should say no to development in favor of (rather vague) arguments on behlf of biodiversity. Even though I hold biodiversity in high regard.

At the governmental level, we might wish to hold people to higher standards. But hey, it is still their country.

In a future (perhaps mythical) world where fossil-fuel C emissions are monetized, there would be more money for business plans emphasizing less deforestation and more afforestation. Can't say anything more about that, as long as we live in a world where fossil-fuel C emissions are 'free' and seen as economically positive on balance.

That said, tropical peatlands have notable carbon stores and converting those to oil palm or any other quick-profit forest seems to me a poor choice. Had I the power to exclude them from 'development', I'd happily do so and suffer any consequences.

 

I am unsure exactly what is going on with this piece of land, but Malaysians do replant. There is a great deal of land destroyed by natural disaster, but this is a sensitive ecosystem. I did buy a number of mango trees that others planted in 2004, to help maintain food for orangutans.

Malaysia does have more than half of its land forested, and the old growth is going away fairly quickly. I used to travel there fairly often. Its sad you see huge tracts of land logged then converted to palm oil orchards or golf courses. I'm not sure of the exact facts, but I'm sure progress will go on. Its hard to look at what europe did not destroy its natural lands then look down on Malaysia.

I'm not sure if carbon trading would stop the conversion. California seemed to give carbon credits in their scheme for tree farms, what would stop a similar scheme from continuing to chop down the rainforest but plant other cash trees?

 

I think we all agree, in all respects. With the exception of Twichet. Since he initiated the post he should give us an idea where he is coming from. Congratulations on the orangutans and the Mango trees, that is certainly ones choice, I love orangutans anyway. ref: your last para: If rainforest were chopped down and then indigious trees were replanted then there is nothing wrong with that. In that case it would not be necessarry to deforest or RAPE which is what the big conglomerates are doing, in many cases these are foreign interest!. The incredibly sad part is, as in South America, a new and non-native crop is grown, cotton, and then after a year or two the soil is then useless for anything. Anymore.:cheer2:

 

Hello Twitchett, It appears as though you misread my whole post. I said your concept may be pretty. Not you, for all I know you may be ugly. But not being supplied with any facts at all, no less pertinent facts, I could not speak accurately about YOUR subject. Now, if you are prepared to speak constructively about your concept, I and I am sure many others may be interested in hearing what you have to say. Most PCers are also environmentalist. :cheer2: