RimbaWatch defends report, says definition of forest grounded in ‘ecological reality’

 

RimbaWatch spokesman Adam Farhan said they defined forests as ‘natural forest cover’ in line with the interpretation of conservation groups.

PETALING JAYA: An environmental NGO has hit back at the forestry department of Peninsular Malaysia for downplaying its report that the projected loss of forests was due to a “difference in understanding”.

RimbaWatch spokesman Adam Farhan said they defined forests as “natural forest cover”.

Such a definition was in line with how civil society and conservation groups generally think what forests should be, he said.

Adam said the government, on the other hand, had adopted the Food and Agriculture Organization’s (FAO) basic definition of forest cover – which included monoculture plantations as forests and defined forest cover according to legal classification of land.

Such a definition would mean that a timber plantation would be considered a forest reserve, he said.

“The ‘difference in understanding’ is that RimbaWatch’s definition of forests is grounded on physical ecological reality while that of the government is based on the legal definition,” he told FMT.

Adam said this in response to the forestry department stating there was no need to be “overly concerned” with RimbaWatch’s findings on the projected loss of 2.3 million hectares of natural forests.

Its director-general, Ridza Awang, said this was because the NGO had a different understanding of the definition of “forest” and the terms “deforestation” and “forest plantation”.

Adam said RimbaWatch defined clear-felling and conversion of a natural forest to a monoculture plantation as deforestation. The government did not accept this and this “did not reflect reality”, he added.

Going by Putrajaya’s definition, Adam said the country could proceed to cut down 100% of its natural forests and replace them with rubber and acacia plantations.

Adam said the government would then be able to argue that this was not deforestation and that the country was still maintaining 50% forest cover.

He said that a natural forest supported hundreds of tree species. Replacing felled timber with just one type of species of trees was not a fix as the surrounding ecosystem would have been badly damaged.

He said in the context of the climate and biodiversity crisis, the government’s treatment of deforestation of natural forests as a non-issue was “both surprising and alarming”.

Adam said Malaysia had a commitment to conserve and enhance natural carbon sinks, including forests, under the Paris Agreement and United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.

“Therefore, by continuing the destruction of natural forests and conversion of such lands to timber plantations, Malaysia is actively degrading and reducing natural carbon sinks, thereby reneging on our international climate commitments.” - FMT