Forest Commissioner James Singh [second from right] and other GFC officials at the head table.

[www.inewsguyana.com] – The Guyana Forestry Commission (GFC) has once again defended the operations of Chinese logging company – Bai Shan Lin – in the face of persistent allegations of irregularities even as it boasts of robust monitoring mechanism to stem illegalities.

 

At a two hour press conference this afternoon (Monday, August 18), Forest Commissioner James Singh made it clear that “there is nothing to hide” as he responded to scores of questions following a presentation to clarify what he described misinformation in some sections of the media.

He pointed out that the management of the sector is based on principles of sustainable forest management and while the company [Bai Shan Lin] would have had infractions “it is not a cause for serious concern or has the potential to compromise forest sustainability.”

Singh enlightened that the infractions are merely procedural and poses no significant damage to the environment. He also expressed confidence in the monitoring mechanisms in place even as he pointed to the independent annual audits.

He reiterated that Bai Shan Lin is allowed to do limited logging to recover 25% of its expenses under its State Forestry Exploratory Permit.

A room filled with loggers, GFC officials and members of the media during the press conference.

“The forest is not being given away to investors, it’s a carefully regulated process,” Singh assured.

The Commissioner, who was backed up by a team from the Commission, said there was no basis for the argument that there is overharvesting and rapid deforestation.

“We have effective traceability, efficient real time monitoring and an efficient database,” he noted as he continued to repeatedly dispel the accusation of illegal logging.

There are reportedly three layers of checks that are conducted before a container is closed for export by GFC.

Responding directly to the accusation that Bai Shan Lin was trucking at nights because the logs were being stolen, Singh said “Trucking is done at nights not because it’s being stolen… there is less traffic and less wear and tear.”

He said too that the pictures showing a log yard with stock piles of logs which were alleged to be all of Bai Shan Lin’s is not the case. He clarified that some 14 operators stock pile logs in the location.

The Commissioner went onto clarify, one after the other, the misconceptions which has spiraled into a national debate.

Among the points made in Singh’s presentation were that Bai Shan Lin has legal access to a total of 627,072 hectares.

He cautioned too that pictures from different locations cannot be tied to any operation unless it is geo-referenced; adding that storage of logs is not testimony of the forest being harvested unsustainably.

Even as the Commissioner defended Bai Shan Lin, he assured too that all other operators, both local and foreign, are monitored without favor.

I donot believe the GFC. They are protecting the Chinese.

I can't remember the last time that so many PPP thieves trying to justify grand larceny on an international scale.

This proves that KN is always involved in TOILET PAPER reporting.

KN is printing snake oil and hogwash on a daily basis.

Originally Posted by Conscience:

Forest Commissioner James Singh [second from right] and other GFC officials at the head table.

[www.inewsguyana.com] – The Guyana Forestry Commission (GFC) has once again defended the operations of Chinese logging company – Bai Shan Lin – in the face of persistent allegations of irregularities even as it boasts of robust monitoring mechanism to stem illegalities.

 

At a two hour press conference this afternoon (Monday, August 18), Forest Commissioner James Singh made it clear that “there is nothing to hide” as he responded to scores of questions following a presentation to clarify what he described misinformation in some sections of the media.

He pointed out that the management of the sector is based on principles of sustainable forest management and while the company [Bai Shan Lin] would have had infractions “it is not a cause for serious concern or has the potential to compromise forest sustainability.”

Singh enlightened that the infractions are merely procedural and poses no significant damage to the environment. He also expressed confidence in the monitoring mechanisms in place even as he pointed to the independent annual audits.

He reiterated that Bai Shan Lin is allowed to do limited logging to recover 25% of its expenses under its State Forestry Exploratory Permit.

A room filled with loggers, GFC officials and members of the media during the press conference.

“The forest is not being given away to investors, it’s a carefully regulated process,” Singh assured.

The Commissioner, who was backed up by a team from the Commission, said there was no basis for the argument that there is overharvesting and rapid deforestation.

“We have effective traceability, efficient real time monitoring and an efficient database,” he noted as he continued to repeatedly dispel the accusation of illegal logging.

There are reportedly three layers of checks that are conducted before a container is closed for export by GFC.

Responding directly to the accusation that Bai Shan Lin was trucking at nights because the logs were being stolen, Singh said “Trucking is done at nights not because it’s being stolen… there is less traffic and less wear and tear.”

He said too that the pictures showing a log yard with stock piles of logs which were alleged to be all of Bai Shan Lin’s is not the case. He clarified that some 14 operators stock pile logs in the location.

The Commissioner went onto clarify, one after the other, the misconceptions which has spiraled into a national debate.

Among the points made in Singh’s presentation were that Bai Shan Lin has legal access to a total of 627,072 hectares.

He cautioned too that pictures from different locations cannot be tied to any operation unless it is geo-referenced; adding that storage of logs is not testimony of the forest being harvested unsustainably.

Even as the Commissioner defended Bai Shan Lin, he assured too that all other operators, both local and foreign, are monitored without favor.

I donot believe the GFC. They are protecting the Chinese.

i see your bottom house brainwashing is wearing off,good for you

This is all hocus pocus not a single shred of evidence produced or documentation produced to tell us how many Guyanese are employed by Bai Shan Lin.

This is nothing more than a load of unfiltered horse shit being peddled by the PPP. They have not refuted Chris Ram's assertions and data showing that Ashni Singh was lying and that log exports were going through the roof.

They have not answered any of the questions Harmon sent them in response to James Singh's letter to him.

These horrible creatures are telling us that this is "limited" logging! Are they seeing what we are seeing...are they seeing the thousands of logs being shipped out as limited logging?

Guyana ‘REDD’: a ‘minor upward variation’ in the problems for Norway

As was foreseen by REDD-Monitor ‘REDD’ in Guyana is rapidly descending into farce. The latest, and perhaps most serious, of a long list of problems is that an independent technical report, released this week, shows that deforestation in Guyana was three times higher than historical levels during the first year of the Norway-Guyana ‘REDD’ agreement, which is intended to reduce emissions from forests.

This presents the Government of Norway with a profound problem. When it signed its Memorandum of Understanding with Guyana in November 2009, an ‘interim’ baseline deforestation rate was set, at a notional 0.45% – even though this was higher than any credible assessment of the actual deforestation rate. Norway gave Guyana $30m for the first year of its agreement, but it was agreed that, for subsequent years, a proper and detailed assessment would take place to determine the actual historical rate of deforestation as assessed by the UN Food and Agriculture Organization, and that Guyana would thence be compensated on a ‘performance basis’ for any lessening of deforestation against the true historical level, to be paid retrospectively, on a yearly basis. The first ‘performance-based payment’ would thus happen in 2011, depending on Guyana’s success in staying below historical baseline rates of deforestation during 2009-10.

The new study, carried out for Norway’s International Forests and Climate Initiative (NICFI) and the Guyana Forest Commission by the Pöyry consultancy, suggests that the actual historical rate of deforestation averaged over several decades was only a mere 0.02% per year – reflecting the low population density in the interior of the country, itself related to the extremely infertile nature of most of Guyana’s soils. More problematic, however, the report suggests that the actual rate of deforestation during the first year of the Norway-Guyana agreement was 0.06%. Whilst this is still low both as a rate and in terms of the actual area of forest lost, it is nevertheless three-times the historical baseline rate. According to the performance measures set out in the Norway-Guyana MoU, Guyana will receive no money this year for ‘reducing emissions from deforestation’ during 2009-10. In any case, the Government of Guyana has never made any explicit commitment to reduce emissions of forest-based carbon.

Guyana’s government will doubtless appeal to a ‘get-out clause’ in an undated technical document provided by NICFI but not available in Guyana, which states that, should the real historical rate of deforestation prove to be very low – as it is now suggested to be – then “minor upward variations” will be tolerated, taking into account the uncertainties of measuring relatively small areas of forest loss over long periods of time. But the Government of Norway will know that it will lose all credibility if it accepts a 300% ‘above baseline’ rate of deforestation as a mere “minor upward variation” – and the technical document anyway fails to stipulate what happens, in terms of REDD payments, should such a situation arise.

But Norway will also no doubt now be looking more closely at the plans being set out by President of Guyana, Bharrat Jagdeo, for spending the Norwegian money. This is supposed to be based partly on the Low Carbon Development Strategy (LCDS), which was originally developed by the increasingly discredited McKinsey and Co, and funded by UK’s Department for International Development and the the Clinton Foundation. Other than the Government of Norway, and in spite of the President’s  frequent overseas travels and speeches, no other donors have stepped forward to provide the US$580 million per year which the LCDS claims Guyana sacrifices as ‘opportunity cost’ for not cutting down its forests. In a parallel process, even the World Bank’s Forest Carbon Partnership Facility has all but stalled, with not a single cent having yet been disbursed for REDD+ preparation in Guyana.

The Norwegian funding – now looking increasingly doubtful – is thus critical to the credibility of the LCDS, which President Jagdeo has very personally led, and almost daily promotes to his country through the media. Whilst Norwegian officials initially appeared to be unworried by the abbreviated rationales for expenditure as set out in the LCDS (exemplified by a mere one and half pages description for the US$600-650 million construction cost for the Amaila Falls dam, among the highest costs of a hydro-electric dam per megawatt in the world), they have no doubt become troubled as some of President Jagdeo’s projects have started to evolve. Of the US$30 million Norwegian funding for 2010, which has already been transferred to the ‘Guyana REDD+ Investment Fund (GRIF)’ account managed by the World Bank, President Jagdeo wants US$ 15-19 million to purchase government equity in the Amaila Falls dam project – for access to the site of which, a road is already being constructed under a contract that was illegally awarded to a Florida-based real estate company with no previous experience of such projects, and before the legally necessary Environmental and Social Impact Assessment had been conducted, and the necessary permit issued by Guyana’s Environmental Protection Agency. Whilst the President wants the Norwegian funding immediately, it is uncertain if the access road will be completed in the scheduled eight months, and it is unlikely that money could anyway be invested in equity in the dam until later in 2011.

Under another LCDS project, US$4 million of the first tranche of Norwegian money is to be invested in ‘demarcation’ of Amerindian lands through a project to be run by the Ministry of Amerindian Affairs and the Guyana Lands and Surveys Commission under the supervision of UNDP which will administer the grant from the GRIF, and reliant on government survey staff. Experts that have seen the UNDP proposal document for this project have expressed astonishment at its legal, technical and administrative weakness, and lack of inclusion of low-cost community mapping by the indigenous communities themselves, which has been carried out successfully by many Amerindian villages in the past. A proposal for a US$1.5 million project for electrification of some Amerindian households through provision of solar panels is, say observers, very similar to a project that was recently financed by the IADB, and that there is a risk of ‘double funding’ of the same activities. A proposal for a US$1.5 million new biodiversity research centre seems surprising and possibly unnecessary in a small country that already has two such centres, one at the University of Guyana, the other at the Iwokrama International Rainforest Centre. None of the projects have yet been approved by the GRIF steering committee, whose terms of reference are still under discussion.

Meanwhile, under the current constitution, President Jagdeo should step down this year, and fresh presidential elections held. Some observers believe that the President wishes to hold on to the reins of power, either by moving into the Prime Minister’s job in a ‘Putin/Medvedev-like’ arrangement, or possibly by revising the constitution to allow him to stand for further terms as President. For either of these scenarios – and anyway to reinforce the electoral prospects of his Peoples Progressive Party – vote-winning projects and handouts in the coming months could be critical. The ‘floating vote’ of the substantial Amerindian population could be particularly critical in a country where Party voting patterns are strongly divided down racial (South Asian vs. Afro-Caribbean) lines.

As well as the huge political stakes that President Jagdeo holds in the LCDS and the Norwegian funding, he also appears to have ‘borrowed’ against future receipts in order to fund existing projects – such as the Amaila Falls dam access road. The recently announced national budget assumes that at least $40m more will be forthcoming from Norway this year  (even though an early draft of the Pöyry report, co-commissioned by the Guyanese authorities, had already started to raise doubts about whether Guyana would qualify for any more of Norway’s funding in 2011). Promises and allocations have probably been made to business colleagues and political allies from this and last year’s Norwegian funds – and keeping these promises could be necessary for a successful re-election campaign. Although all Norwegian funds are to be approved by the Guyana REDD+ Investment Fund – the Office of Climate Change, which is located within the President’s office, will oversee the proposals to the GRIF and will give direction to the chairman of the GRIF Steering Committee, Tarchand Balgobin, who is a close associate within Jagdeo’s ruling party.

Norwegian officials will thus no doubt be coming under immense pressure to ease through the projects, and to find a ‘creative’ way to overcome the problems that they have so far paid $30 million into the GRIF, even though deforestation increased, and that according to the terms of their agreement, no money should be paid to Guyana in 2011. An ‘audit’ of the Government of Guyana’s conformance with the terms of the MoU, to be carried out by the US-based Rainforest Alliance, has still not been published. To add to their woes, as REDD-Monitor recently reported, the Guyanese government is busy handing out concessions to logging and mining companies that will see millions of hectares of forest damaged or destroyed – and thus the rise in deforestation (as well as degradation from logging operations) looks set to continue.

The world will be watching closely to see whether Norway acts to retain the integrity and credibility of its ‘REDD’ initiative in the important test-case country of Guyana, or succumbs to political pressure from a President who seems to be confident that he can persuade Norway to set aside or water down the conditionalities in the MoU.

http://www.redd-monitor.org/20...s-norway-a-headache/

Bai Shan Lin logging scandal deepens…Bai Shan Lin says in full page ad application took four years to process GO-INVEST has no application for logging or any related activity – Opposition

The recent expose by this publication on what appears to be the exploitation of Guyana’s forests by Bai Shan Lin has driven the Chinese firm and the Guyana Forestry Commission into campaigns which seek to repair their image.

Keith Burrowes, CEO of GO-Invest

Through paid advertisements, the two entities have attempted to provide the public with the information some critics have refused to accept because they feel it is not the entire truth. In one of its ads in the Kaieteur News Sunday publication, Bai Shan Lin stated that in 2008, it applied to the “Government of Guyana through the Guyana Office for Investment (GO-Invest) and other agencies to lease lands to set up a factory to process logs and engage in value added production, such as the making of furniture, craft and hard wood flooring.” Since issuing this statement, several opposition members have said that Go-Invest should publically state its role with the said company and why it has failed as the government’s main investment agency to monitor how Guyana is benefitting from the deals struck with the company and the government. However, when contacted yesterday, Keith Burrowes, CEO of GO-invest, declined to release any information in this regard. Burrowes told this publication, “I prefer not to comment on your questions on Bai Shan Lin and considering that only recently I was appointed the CEO of this company, I can assure that I will look into it.” However, after being apprised with these comments, some opposition members said that the CEO’s response only leaves one to wonder as to why he could not answer simple questions about the company’s role regarding Bai Shan Lin. Burrowes’ statements does little to quell mounting concerns that Bai Shan Lin never went to GO-Invest for any investment deal that involves interest in logging or any related activity as it claimed in its advertisement.

Chairman of Chinese- owned, Bai Shan Lin, Chu Wenze

It is believed by reliable political sources that the company skipped Go-Invest and was in partnership solely with the Ministry of Natural Resources and the Guyana Forestry Commission for all its “sweet investment proposals.” Shadow Finance Minister of A Partnership for National Unity (APNU), Carl Greenidge, said that the gathering storm over the management of Guyana’s forestry and related concessions raises a number of troubling questions especially as this Government approaches the end of its term in office. Greenidge said that the questions relate to what benefits the country is getting from the destruction or utilization of resources that are not being replaced or renewed, and whether Guyana has to set up special and independent Courts to prosecute those who facilitate large scale economic crimes before the PPP will desist from this behavior. The politician said that another question which needs to be answered is what are the criteria governing the extension of such large and varied concessions across sectors to investors in general and foreign firms in particular. The Parliamentarian said that the current controversy over the policies associated with the operations of Bai Shan Lin and Vaitarna Holdings Private Inc (VHPI)    are only part of a more insidious process already under way in Guyana. “We need to get answers to some specific questions such as what informed the size of the concessions granted to these companies.” He said that Barbados’ area is 166 sq miles and the Iwokrama Reserve is 3710 sq miles. Greenidge highlighted that the concessions granted to the two companies alone, are almost as large as the Reserve.

Former President Bharrat Jagdeo

The Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee said too that Vaitarna Holdings Private Inc (VHPI) has been granted 2469 sq miles – apparently the largest of all the concessions, and Bai Shan Lin 1058, giving a total of approximately 3237sq miles. The reason for this remains unknown, Greenidge said. “Guyanese need to know the real truth and they should start first by answering these questions,” the politician asserted.

James Singh , Commissioner of the Guyana Forestry Commission

Minister of Natural Resources, Robert Persaud

Oh boy, more thief man and thuggish behavior by the PPP. Maybe Dr. Baseman has a different theory on these developments.

Gov’t admits deforestation could hurt Norway funding

  …Guyana stands to lose US$25 million  

By Neil Marks

The government yesterday admitted that it could lose an estimated US$20 million from its forest-saving deal with Norway. This follows a new report, which shows increased levels of deforestation in 2012. Under the five-year forest-saving deal with Norway, Guyana needed to monitor the amount of the forest cut down, and to keep it at a level agreed to by the two countries. Once Guyana kept its end of the deal, it would bank US$250 million, but now a chunk of that could be lost. The reason is that under the agreement with Norway, the number of trees being chopped down, or what is called deforestation, was set at 0.07 per cent, but a monitoring and evaluation exercise found that last year, the level of deforestation was 0.079 per cent, more than allowed under the agreement between Guyana and Norway. If the percentage is converted into actual forest loss, it means that more than 36,000 acres of forests were cut down in 2012 that was about 9,000 acres more than that cut down the year before. The Minister with responsibility for forestry, Robert Persaud, was not ready to be forthright in saying that because of the increase in deforestation Guyana could lose the Norwegian funds, but he did anyhow. “If what we have is accurate…somewhere in the range of about US$20M or thereabouts (could be lost),” Persaud said at a press conference yesterday. The actual figure Guyana stands to lose is about US$25 million. The Minister said that a University contracted by the Guyana Forestry Commission, plus an independent team from Norway has to verify the report on the increased level of deforestation has to be confirmed before it could be said with certainty that the Norwegian funds could be lost. Jagdesh Singh, Deputy Commissioner of the Guyana Forestry Commission, said that those two verification processes could be completed by the end of this month. The use of new technology, namely satellite imaging, helped to detect the increased levels of deforestation, the Minister said. However, he would not agree that the absence of such accurate technology at the time of the signing of the agreement could mean that the two parties did not have a clear picture of the state of the country’s forests. The Minister said that 36, 000 acres of forest cut down in 2012 is nothing to be alarmed about since the country’s total forest cover, taking into account  including Amerindian lands and protected areas, amounts to over 45 million acres. The new deforestation figures are contained in Guyana’s third national report on deforestation rates under the Monitoring, Reporting and Verification (MRV) system – a mechanism under REDD+, the UN programme for saving the world’s rainforest. One of the main factors driving deforestation in Guyana is mining, and the Minister emphasised that the government is interested in robust legislation and the enforcement of related guidelines to manage the sector. But Persaud said that the mining activities clearing the forest is not “lawless” mining, since these operations where there is forest clearing are sanctioned by the Guyana Geology and Mines Commission, GGMC. The Minister said that the issue with the mining sector is therefore not a question of scaling up or scaling down operations, but of ensuring sustainable operations. Persaud emphasised that while there has been an increase in deforestation here – less than 0.1 per cent – it is among the lowest in the world.

Sustainable development .. in this specific situation, sustainable forest management .. means that indeed logging activities do take place that adheres to the overall specific issues of the area.

Originally Posted by Conscience:

Forest Commissioner James Singh [second from right] and other GFC officials at the head table.

[www.inewsguyana.com] – The Guyana Forestry Commission (GFC) has once again defended the operations of Chinese logging company – Bai Shan Lin – in the face of persistent allegations of irregularities even as it boasts of robust monitoring mechanism to stem illegalities.

 

At a two hour press conference this afternoon (Monday, August 18), Forest Commissioner James Singh made it clear that “there is nothing to hide” as he responded to scores of questions following a presentation to clarify what he described misinformation in some sections of the media.

He pointed out that the management of the sector is based on principles of sustainable forest management and while the company [Bai Shan Lin] would have had infractions “it is not a cause for serious concern or has the potential to compromise forest sustainability.”

Singh enlightened that the infractions are merely procedural and poses no significant damage to the environment. He also expressed confidence in the monitoring mechanisms in place even as he pointed to the independent annual audits.

He reiterated that Bai Shan Lin is allowed to do limited logging to recover 25% of its expenses under its State Forestry Exploratory Permit.

A room filled with loggers, GFC officials and members of the media during the press conference.

“The forest is not being given away to investors, it’s a carefully regulated process,” Singh assured.

The Commissioner, who was backed up by a team from the Commission, said there was no basis for the argument that there is overharvesting and rapid deforestation.

“We have effective traceability, efficient real time monitoring and an efficient database,” he noted as he continued to repeatedly dispel the accusation of illegal logging.

There are reportedly three layers of checks that are conducted before a container is closed for export by GFC.

Responding directly to the accusation that Bai Shan Lin was trucking at nights because the logs were being stolen, Singh said “Trucking is done at nights not because it’s being stolen… there is less traffic and less wear and tear.”

He said too that the pictures showing a log yard with stock piles of logs which were alleged to be all of Bai Shan Lin’s is not the case. He clarified that some 14 operators stock pile logs in the location.

The Commissioner went onto clarify, one after the other, the misconceptions which has spiraled into a national debate.

Among the points made in Singh’s presentation were that Bai Shan Lin has legal access to a total of 627,072 hectares.

He cautioned too that pictures from different locations cannot be tied to any operation unless it is geo-referenced; adding that storage of logs is not testimony of the forest being harvested unsustainably.

Even as the Commissioner defended Bai Shan Lin, he assured too that all other operators, both local and foreign, are monitored without favor.

I donot believe the GFC. They are protecting the Chinese.

www.inewsguyana.com is Robert Persaud's media outfit.

Robert Persaud is Minister of Natural Resources. His ministry is partly accountable for Bai Shan Lin's forestry holdings.

www.inewsguyana.com has to make Robert and Bai look good.

Chinese companies using “illegal” permits for large-scale logging in the Congo

Olivia Boyd

        30.10.2012          

An investigation by Global Witness has revealed how foreign companies are exploiting Congolese forests to feed Chinese demand for tropical hardwood. Researcher Colin Robertson spoke to chinadialogue from DRC.

Chinese companies are using artisanal permits for large-scale logging (Image copyright: World Resources)

Listen to the fraudsters

Forestry Commission clears the forest of all life forms.

pposition-attacks-against-chinese-consistent-and-calculated--ppp-&catid=35:last-top-news">Opposition attacks against Chinese consistent and calculated – PPP

Chinese companies are using artisanal permits for large-scale logging (Image copyright: World Resources)

The corrupt PPP is more concerned about safeguarding Chinese profiteering interests than about Guyana's rainforest and Amerindians' interests.

The voters will decide if the PPP is right or wrong. Or wrong and strong.

These people have lots of nerve to defend the indefensible. The matter is not refutable. Our trees are being cut en mass. That BaiShanlin has no Timber Sales Agreement means little. The whole forestry process means little since we are only getting 16 million annually at max for the trees. That does not pay the salary for these greasers in office. We need a moratorium on cutting down trees immediately.

The PPP will not support this. The Opposition needs to say with courage they will. There is no profit to our nation in selling trees. The only one who profits are the Chinese and those in whose pockets the bribes goes.

Again, posting this three places does nothing. All it shows is that people dependent on the Predatory Chinese loggers are worried they would lose their cash flow. That means little if we will lose our forests!

The sinister motives of the opposition aligned newspaper is once again exposed.

You mean the rent seeking PPP leeches are being exposed.

Councie, you have no credibility.

Bai Shan Lin ignores local requirement in exporting Locust wood to China

Unprocessed Locust and Crabwood should first satisfy local demand before any such wood can be exported overseas; but this is not the case with Bai Shan Lin. It has been found that the company is planning to export over the course of the next six months, 250,000BM of Locust wood, despite local operators approaching them to buy.

Some of the locust wood ready for shipment to China while local demand is being ignored

On Monday last, Haimorakabra Logging Inc, one of Bai Shan Lin’s companies, wrote to the Guyana Manufacturers and Services Association (GM&SA) to indicate its intention to ship the lumber. Haimorakabra Logging Inc. is now owned by Bai Shan Lin International Forest Development Inc. A representative from a local company had approached the company last week to purchase some of the Locust wood for local consumption. This publication has since been told that Gao Yuan, Manager of the Chinese-owned operations reportedly expressed shock that the Locust wood was advertised for sale since he indicated that it was destined for export to China. According to the letter of intention addressed to GMSA’s President, Clinton Williams, by Yuan, the company intends to ship the wood to Heilongjiang Baishanlin Wood Company Ltd., in China. Government had initially not made known what exactly are their arrangements with Bai Shan Lin. The company is now facing investigations by the Opposition after revelations that it is involved in large-scale logging, even allegedly hiding behind third parties to mask the exports. There have been questions over the company’s involvement in Guyana, with the Ministry of Natural Resources and the Environment appearing in Parliament to answer questions. A look at export figures, unofficially supplied, indicated that for the first half of 2013, some 30,000 cubic metres of timber products were exported. For the first half of 2014, this figure rose to over 50,000 cubic metres. This would be significant as Guyana has introduced what is known as a disincentive scheme – a gradually increasing tax and royalty scheme. Despite the increase in tax, the exports have shot up. The Guyana Forestry Commission itself has not explained the rise in the exports, but industry insiders said that Bai Shan Lin is playing a major part in this. The deals with the company were reportedly signed during the period when former President Bharrat Jagdeo was heavily promoting his Low Carbon Development Strategy which among other things targeted increased tracking of illegal logging.

BaiShanlin and Jalin are the same company. The chinese created four with numerous subsideries for exactly the purpose above, that they can use one to do all sorts of bad things and still have a foot in logging. The Chinese companies are all from the same seed no different from the Malaysian companies being owned by the same family consortium. This has been addressed before.

All foreign companies needed to be booted out. They are a all not going to be of any worth to us. The PPP may need them to line their pockets. We do not need them.

Again, we do not get as much for our logs as the Chinese get for renting their Pandas to the US! Why are Pandas more privileged than our jaguar, our baboons, our peccary our agouti our turtles etc? Plus I am definite that no potential for medicinal value lie in the panda. but every acre of forest cleared has a multitude of medicinal value to the world.