Forest Management Public Summary for Gethal

Forest Management Public Summary
for
Gethal Amazonas S.A.: Industria de Madeira Compensada
Certification Code: SW-FM/COC-119
Date of Certification: October 1, 2000
Date of Public Summary: October 2000
Updated for Annual Audit 2002, Annual Audit 2003
This document was produced according to the guidelines of the
Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) and the SmartWood Program.
No part of the report should be published separately.
Certifier:
SmartWood Program1
c/o Rainforest Alliance
65 Bleecker Street, 6th Floor
New York, New York 10012 U.S.A.
TEL: (212) 677-1900 FAX: (212) 677-2187
Email: [email protected]
Website: www.smartwood.org
This certification was conducted in collaboration with the following member of the SmartWood Network:
Instituto de Manejo e Certificacao
Florestal e Agricola (IMAFLORA)
Av. Carlos Botelho, 853
Piracicaba, Sao Paulo
CEP 13418-240 Brazil
TEL/FAX: (55) 194-33-0234 or 22-6253 (call first)
Email: [email protected]
To earn SmartWood certification, a forest management operation must undergo an on-site field
assessment. This Public Summary Report summarizes information contained in the initial assessment
report, which is produced based on information collected during the field assessment. Annual audits are
conducted to monitor the forest management operation’s activities, to review the operation’s progress
toward meeting their certification conditions, and to verify compliance with the SmartWood standards.
1
SmartWood is implemented worldwide by the nonprofit members of the SmartWood Network. The Network is
coordinated by the Rainforest Alliance, an international nonprofit conservation organization. The Rainforest
Alliance is the legally registered owner of the SmartWood certification mark and label. All uses of the SmartWood
label for promotion must be authorized by SmartWood Network headquarters. SmartWood certification applies to
forest management practices only and does not represent endorsement of other product qualities (e.g., financial
performance to investors, product function, etc.). SmartWood is accredited by the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC)
for the certification of natural forest management, tree plantations and chain of custody.
Addenda providing the updated information obtained during these annual audits are included as
attachments to the Public Summary Report.
INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of the independent evaluation for certification purposes carried out by a
team of specialists representing IMAFLORA and the SmartWood Program of the Rainforest Alliance. The
object of this action is to make an evaluation of the ecological, economical and social aspects of the forest
management of Gethal Amazonas according to FSC Principles and Criteria, as expressed in the
SmartWood Guidelines for Assessing Forest Management.
This report is made up of the following chapters: I) a general description of the company and its socioeconomic environment; ii) the methodology employed by the Imaflora/SmartWood team; iii)an evaluation
of each theme listed in the General Guidelines for Assessing Forest Management on the basis of the
SmartWood Program Criteria; iv) notes, pre-conditions and conditions for the certification of Gethal forest
management.
The purpose of the SmartWood Program is to recognize good forest managers through credible
independent evaluation and certification. Forest management operations that achieve SmartWood
certification are able to use the SmartWood logo, and also the FSC – Forest Stewardship Council logo, in
their advertising and marketing campaigns.
1. General Summary
1.1 Name of the Operation and Contact Information
Name of the organization in charge of forest operations –
Gethal Amazonas S/A Indústria de Madeira Compensada
Address and Location of the Headquarters Office
Office/Plant
Address
Headquarters
Rua Ernesto Thalheimer
1412
CEP 69100-000
Itacoatiara – AM
Office Itacoatiara
Manicoré Branch
Tel
Fax
E-mail
Tel.: (092) 521-1527/1550
Geographical
Coordinates
Fax: (092) 521-2090
[email protected]
Long.58º25’00”W
Alt.: 18 m
Lat.: 3º08’54”S
Av. Getúlio Vargas 554
Centro
CEP 69280-000
Manicoré – AM
Tel.: (092) 385-1037
Lat.: 5º50’00”S
Fax: (092) 385-1002
[email protected]
Long.61º18’30”W
Alt.: 50 m
Manaus Branch
Office
Av. Djalma Batista, 3000
Salbna 20 Amazon Flat
Manaus – AM
Tel.: (092) 236-1935
Fax: (092) 236-3893
[email protected]
Lat.: 3º06’00”S
Long.60º00’00”W
Alt.: 21 m
São Paulo Branch
Office
Address being changed
Tel.: (011) 246-8594
Fax: (011) 524-8594
[email protected]
Lat.:23º32’51”S
Long.46º38’10”W
Alt.: 760 m
(Field activities
support office)
List of people in charge of forest management operations
•
Planning and General Coordination:
Bruno Stern – President (São Paulo)
Fernando Ludke – Forester – Director (Itacoatiara)
Ricardo Luiz Ludke – Forester – Coordinator of Forest and Operational Activities (Itacoatiara/Manicoré)
João Rui Ferreira Fernandez – Forester – In charge of Documentation and Inventory Data Processing
(Itacoatiara)
• Forest & Agriculture Specialists - Field Coordinators in Manicoré
Rosiney Soares – Logging Supervisor
Raimundo de Souza Maia – In charge of Forest Inventory and liana clearing operations
Sebastião da Silva Barata – In charge of Forest re-stocking
Valdo Oliveira – In charge of forest roads and trails
Roosevelt Santos – In charge of administrative controls and post-harvesting monitoring
Ricardo Gadelha – In charge of general administration of the Manicoré Office
Cleomilton Dias – Coordinator for skidding, loading and log yard operations
Joelson de Oliveira Rolim – In charge of felling operations
Julio Cézar da Silva Pinho – Forest Inventory technician
Manoel José Ferreira Mar – Technical Assistant (opening of forest inventory lines)
Field crews also include:
Logging: 63 workers
Inventory: 28 workers
Re-stocking: 16 workers
River Transportation: 9 sailors (under the coordination of a supervisor located in Itacoatiara)
•
Office Clerks:
Eliana Lira Barata – Office Assistant in Manicoré
Lucinete Dolzanes – Secretary in Itacoatiara
1.2. Background Information
A. Type of Operation
Forest management in highland forest natural areas of the middle Madeira river (a tributary of the Amazon
river), Amazonas State, Brazilian Amazon Region. Forest operation under the coordination of an
enterprise funded by Brazilian and American capital, carried out in its own areas.
B. History
Gethal Amazonas S/A Indústria de Madeira Compensada is a recently formed corporation, officially
established in 1998. It is the result of a partition of the Gethal Group, a German capital corporation
(Westag) which owns companies in southern Brazil (São Paulo and Rio Grande do Sul).
The original Gethal Group was established 52 years ago in Caxias do Sul, RS to produce veneer and
plywood. In 1972, as wood supplies became scarce in southern Brazil, the company decided to set up a
plant in Itacoatiara which produced veneer for a plywood plant in Santa Catarina state. In 1980 a decision
was made to establish a plywood plant in Itacoatiara and the first plywood panel was built there in 1988.
Until that time all wood used in veneer manufacturing was bought from independent loggers.
In 1989, due to the growing pressure to set up its own management plans, the company started buying
forest areas to assure its raw material needs and also encouraged its independent suppliers to establish
forest management plans. At that time management plans were prepared for 26,000 ha of flood plain
forests, which were logged by the company’s subcontractors.
In 1994 the company’s higher administration underwent a re-structuring process, and Bruno Stern became
its Executive Director; a forestry department was created and put under the coordination of Forester
Fernando Ludke, who today is also the company’s Financial and Administrative Director. In 1994 a
project called NOESMA – New Wood Species from the Amazon – was created in order to promote the
use of non-traditional wood; this project already identified and introduced 34 new species into the market.
In 1995 Gethal starts showing interest in certification processes; in 1966 it decided to seek the
certification of its forest
operations and held the first meeting with representatives of the
IMAFLORA/SmartWood Program. Between 1995 and 1999 the company expanded its forest base with
the purchase of new areas and the creation of a forest department. Today this department, which
employs three foresters and 10 forest technicians, is one of the better structured of the region.
In 1998 the owners of the Gethal Group decided to sell part of their share, and the company was divided
in two: one dealing with the areas of Metallurgy and Construction, and the other with forest management
operations and the plywood plant in Itacoatiara. Most of this second company was purchased by the
Nilorey Group, represented by its Director, Bruno Stern. This change was consolidated in 1999, when the
capital of Gethal Amazonas was divided between the Nilorey Group (75%) and the original German group
(25%), which has the rights to the forest areas.
After six months of evaluations and adaptations, in January 1999 the company received the chain-ofcustody certificate for its Itacoatiara plant (SW-COC-121), which uses certified wood from Mil Madeireira
Itacoatiara Ltda. (SW-COC/FM-019) as part of its raw material supply.
In February 2000, an investment fund of Dellaware, managed by GMO Renewable Resources of Boston,
MA, bought the Nilorey shares and also the Gethal Amazonas shares that were in the hands of
Westag&Getalit, incorporating them as capital of TBU(x) Participações Ltda. It also purchased part of the
areas under forest management plans which were owned by Gethal Imóveis, using them to increase the
assets of TBU Participações Ltda. As a result of these transactions a new company was formed,
FLOREAM – Florestas Renováveis da Amazônia, which replaced TBU, and became the owner of 100% of
the shares of Gethal Amazonas S/A. Today shares of Floream are divided as follows: 15% belong to
Nilorey and 85% to BFFI(x).
This last change in share ownership was negotiated after mid 1999 and forest certification was one of the
conditions established by the new majority shareholders.
The areas that are the subject of this evaluation -- Democracia project -- represent close to 30% of the
value of the company´s forests and nearly 90% of the factory´s supply that comes from its own areas.
The forestry operations in this area were begun in 1998.
C. Latitude and Longitude of the Forest Operations and Description of Each Area
The company has, in practice, three forest areas. The Democracia Forest Management Plan in the Rio
Madeira region, Manicoré Municipality, the subject of this evaluation, is the main one and consists of three
modules of distinct blocks under one Forest Management Plan. Another area is the Fazenda Curitiba
where silvicultural experiments, mainly with native species, are carried out.
The Democracia module, in the Rio Madeira region, is located along the road called “access road to the
Manaus-Porto Velho” highway. It crosses the Igarapé Jatuarana, on the left margin of the Rio Madeira,
and consists of 17 blocks. The Rio Atininga module is made up of four blocks along the river of the same
name, a tributary to the right margin of Rio Madeira. The Rio Maturá module, consists of 13 blocks and is
located along the river of the same name, also a tributary to the right margin of the Rio Madeira.
In total the company has 155,704 ha of forests distributed among the municipalities of Itacoatiara,
Humaitá, Urucará, Carauari, Anamã, Lábrea and Novo Aripuanã (see appendix for a list of forest areas
and the Amazon map showing the regions where the company owns land).
Latitude and Longitude: 5° 50´ 00" S x 61° 18´ 30" W
Name, size (ha) and location of each forest area (Manicoré)
Module Name
Vila Democracia
Area Description
It is the more populated area, with better access and road infrastructure. A
municipal road, maintained with help from the company, goes through it. Next
to it there is an area of about 20,000 ha with an approved management plan,
Fazenda Curitiba
Rio Mataurá
owned by Mr. Valdenor, who wants to log it in partnership with the company.
A farm with about one third of its area (or 400 ha) deforested by the previous
owner. Today it is used for reforestation and silvicultural experiments, mainly
with Amazon native species.
This area consists of 13 blocks, 12 of them interconnected or divided only by
the Maturá river. Five blocks (Taracuá, Acurau and Pinatuba I, Pinatuba II and
Pinatuba III) may be included in the future into the indian reservation to be
established by FUNAI. Activities have been more intense in this region in the
last three years.
D. Scope of the Evaluation
The scope of this evaluation includes forests of various legally-owned areas (deeds) which are property of
Gethal, and also areas under its direct management, which together are called Democracia project. They
cover a total of 40,862.60 ha and consist of three large regions: Vila Democracia, Rio Mataurá and
Fazenda Curitiba. The areas of Fazenda Curitiba occupied by plantations were not included in the scope
of this evaluation.
In addition to these areas, Gethal owns another 100.000 ha of forest land, of which 20,000 ha are already
part of the company plans for forest management and certification in the next years. The remaining
80,000 ha have already undergone some type of intervention by traditional logging methods or include
special types of ecosystems, such as flood plain, and will be the object of future evaluation and definition
of specific management plan. The company has assumed the commitment to promote forest
management according to FSC Principles and Criteria in all of its areas.
E. Administrative Structure
Mr. Bruno Stern, President of Gethal Amazonas, has his office in São Paulo and takes care of sales,
marketing, and the general management of the company. Two directors are located in Itacoatiara, where
the veneer and plywood plants are in operation, one for industrial operations (Mr. Joel Carlos Alípio,
Forester) and one for administration, finances and forest operations (Mr. Fernando Ludke, Forester).
The forestry sector is under administrative and operational coordination of Forester Ricardo Luiz, assisted
by Forester João Ruy, who is responsible for processing forest inventory data and preparing reports
(documentation). All important decisions of the forestry sector are reached with direct participation of the
Forest and Administrative Director, Mr. Fernando Ludke.
In Manicoré there is an advanced office, consisting of two rooms in the downtown area, which provide
support to field personnel in their local activities. Field work is coordinated jointly by the logging
supervisor (Rosinei), Inventory and Liana Clearing Coordination (Maia), Roads and Trails Coordination
(Valdo), Felling Coordination (Joelson), Skidding Coordination (Cleomilton) and Administrative Controls
and Post-harvesting Monitoring (Roosevelt).
1.3. Forest Management System
A. Type of Forest; History of Land Use and Tenure Rights
The Democracia Project areas, which belong to FLOREAM, the corporation which controls Gethal, have
proper ownership titles except for those of the Fazenda Curitiba. These areas were only partially
registered by the former owner; they are covered with dense tropical forest, with little or no impact from
human activities. They are mostly highland areas irrigated by innumerous “igarapés” (small water
courses).
The main forest species are: Abius, Abiuranas, Angelins, Muirapiranga, Copaíba, Castanheira, Tachi,
Favas and Tauaris.
The areas in Vila Democracia have been used by the local people for the extraction of non-timber
products for their own use or for small scale trade. According to information supplied by villagers,
extraction of “Pau Rosa”, a wood species valued for its pleasant odor extractives, was carried out in the
past. Logging trails related to this activity can still be found in the area.
Some families live near, or even inside the company areas, always close to water courses. The forest
management plan established by the company is the second in the region, after the one put into effect by
Mr. Valdenor Campos Costa, who currently operates in partnership with Gethal.
In five blocks of the Rio Aruá, a tributary of the right margin of the Rio Mataurá, with a total area of 3,452.1
ha, there is a dispute with FUNAI which has plans for establishing an indian reservation. After the
evaluation had been carried out a decree was issued creating the Pinatuba Reservation. For this reason
the company has dropped this area from its management plan.
B. Size of the forest areas in comparison with production areas and conservation and/or
recuperation areas
The Democracia Project has a total area of 40,826.6 ha, of which 1,862,6 ha are permanent preservation
areas and 1,878.4 ha are considered areas of absolute preservation, although they have not been
established yet. There are 723.8 ha of areas that underwent anthropic interference and 3,452.1 ha
excluded from the management plan due to FUNAI plans to create the Pinatuba Indian Land.
It is important to mention that the permanent preservation area tends to increase as the prospecting
inventory (100% coverage) activities are carried out in blocks to be harvested, since it usually detects new
water bodies and steep slope areas.
C. Regional Landscape Context
The Manicoré region is covered mainly by highland forest, although some floodplain areas also occur.
The town of Manicoré is located in the center of the region and a series of villages or communities,
sometimes with about 100 houses, are found along the local rivers. Some cattle ranches have been
established in the region, but most of the area is still covered with forests.
The Rio Madeira is the main waterway linking the grain producing areas of the Brazilian Midwest to the
port of Itacoatiara. It has significantly encouraged grain exports to other regions of the country and also to
other countries. This activity is expected to increase in the near future and represents a threat to the
conservation of the forests of the region, especially those not explicitly designated as conservation or
forest management areas.
D. Annual Production Volume estimated and allowed by the Management Plan
Forest Production Volume Allowed (m3)
Gethal FMP
Democracia
Vale
Searihã
Santa Rita
São Sebastião
Juma
Jurará
* Forecast
1996
1997
9,231.00
1,243.00
25,883
1998
11,959.60
8,732.20
1,326.49
25,883
1999*
97,910.35
9,397.20
1,837.51
1,268
-
2000*
102,882
21,356
1,837
6,329
-
123,882
21,356
2,753
6,329
-
E. General Description of the Management Plan Objective and Details
Gethal manages an area of 37,410.5 ha of a total area of 40,826.6 ha, of which 3,741 ha (10%) are
designated as permanent preservation and absolute forest reserve areas. In the managed area a
selective cutting system with a 25-year cycle is used, with removal of 22.5 m3/ha/year of 71 different
species. The harvesting plan for the current year is for 15 m3/ha. Estimated growth yield for the
commercial species used by the company is of the order of 1.1 m3/ha/year, which means that the
remaining forest has a volume increment of 27.5 m3/ha by the end of the rotation cycle.
The logging system used is a combination of the one developed by the Tropical Forest Foundation – TFF,
and the data from IMAZON – Institute for Man and the Environment in the Amazon. A summary of the
interventions is presented below:
Chronology
One year before Harvesting
(Operational)
6 months
before felling
Felling year
Up to one year
after felling
Every 3 – 5 yrs
after felling
Activities
Topographic survey of compartments and roads
Definition of stands
Road construction
Pre-harvesting inventory – 100% of all commercial and noncommercial species/trees with DBH above 35 cm
Liana clearing
Establishment and measurement of permanent plots
Final analysis of inventory data
Planning of harvesting activities
Harvesting and transport of the wood
First measurement of permanent plots after harvesting
Evaluation of logging impacts
Subsequent measurement of permanent plots
Silvicultural treatments
Logging involves a 100% inventory of all trees with DBH greater than 35 cm, with data on their location
(trail, stand, block, x/y coordinates), form and quality of the bole, diameter, commercial height, and also
information on the local topography (flat, low land, rolling terrain etc.) Inventory data is stored in a
portable computer (palmtop). The selection of trees to be felled is based on the 100% inventory, basically
considering economic criteria, rarity of the species, tree size and quality, and its importance to natural
regeneration.
A map is prepared with the help of an electronic spreadsheet with the data generated by the harvesting
inventory. The computer program currently used by the company is not adequate and, for this reason, the
employees involved in this task are being trained to work with another program. The harvesting map is
subdivided into 50mx50m blocks, which is the smallest area considered in planning the activities, such as
the skidding trails and field plotting after the trees are felled. The felling program is defined directly by the
field crews in the office set up next to the logging camp.
Directional felling is used in order to facilitate skidding, as well as to minimize the impact on seed
dispersing and other remaining trees.
The initial removal of logs is done by skidders equipped with hydraulic grapples and steel rope winches,
these rarely used. The skidders bring the logs from the tertiary and secondary skidding trails to the log
yards. During the night the logs are transported, also by skidders, from the log yards to the river ports
where the wood is later loaded on barges to be sent to the plant. When hauling the logs from their
original felling places the skidder operator follows trails previously identified and marked with colored
ribbons by the crew member responsible for the removal of the wood. Steel ropes are only used in places
of difficult access and for distances not greater than 15 meters. The impact on the understory vegetation
is greater with the system adopted than that caused by winch/steel rope. However, the impact on the
soil is less than that of a system based on pre-hauling with steel cable followed by track-skidder hauling.
Due to the fact that the skid trails are planned with many curves, and also because the logs are usually
very large, wood damage at the ends is significant and some adjustment must be introduced in the
system.
In the more critical periods, i.e. in the beginning and in the end of the rainy season, while forest operations
are still going on but the roads cannot support truck traffic, a pre-skidding operation is used. In this case
the log yards are connected to each other by skid trails used by skidders to haul logs from one yard to the
other.
Measurements of the impacts caused by logging are carried out up to one year after harvesting, but there
is no consideration of impacts on the fauna. Monitoring inventory is carried out in permanent plots
established before logging. There are some problems in data collection for this monitoring, mainly in
relation to the statistical methods employed, which must be improved.
Since 1999 the company has added liana clearing to the activities carried out during the pre-harvesting
inventory at 100% coverage, in order to diminish the impact of tree felling on other trees during the logging
operations.
Logs stored in the yards at the riverside port are transferred by front-end loaders into barges that take
them to Itacoatiara.
1.4 Socio-economic and Environmental Context
The municipality of Manicoré was established by Law No. 362, of July 4, 1877; for unknown reasons its
formal installation only happened one year later, on May 15, 1878, and its founder was Lieutenant Colonel
Manuel Pereira de Sá.
Manicoré is located in the middle area of the Madeira River, Amazon State, 333 km from Manaus by
2
plane, and 427 km by river navigation. It has a total surface area of 65,633 km ,and a rainy and humid
tropical climate. Total population is of the order of 50,000 people, about 21,700 of them living in rural
areas and 28,300 in the township, according to the estimates supplied by the town hall. The 1990 census
counted 37,536 inhabitants, of which 15,390 in the urban area and 22,146 in the rural zones.
The main economic activities are: fishing, non-timber forest products (Brazil nuts, latex, copaíba oil and
titica vine), agriculture, cattle raising, and mineral extraction, mainly cassiterite out of Igarapé Preto. With
the arrival of Gethal Amazonas, logging has been intensified. Manicoré has a large production of
watermelon, around 2 million fruits per crop, and is considered the largest producer of northern Brazil. In
the region cattle raising activities, especially for meat production, are carried out in large expansions of
land, with a small number of animals per unit surface area.
Extractivist and gathering activities play an important role in the economy of the region. At different times
in the history of the municipality, the extraction of latex from Hevea trees as well as the gathering of Brazil
nuts, through the mechanism of “aviamento”, brought in financial resources that forged the current socioeconomic structure of the municipality. To this date it still possible to observe the polarity that
characterizes that mechanism: on one hand the agro-extractivist laborers subsisting from the work of
family members in small scale agriculture and in the use of different products of the forest, and on the
other, the owners of large tracts of land from where latex and Brazil nuts are extracted. In exchange for
letting the workers explore their land, and also for advancing them staple goods, fuel etc., the landlords
charge a fee or receive part of their production as payment. However, in contrast with what happens in
other regions of the Amazon, in Manicoré there is no further processing of products extracted from the
forest such as shelling and packaging Brazil nuts. The landlords and traders who receive the products
have commercial links with wholesalers that operate from the main centers of the region (Itacoatiara,
Manaus, Belém). The main non timber products exported from the region are: titica liana, copaíba oil,
Brazil nuts, and hevea latex.
Due to its very limited industry, the municipality has been strongly influenced by the so- called
governmental development programs, such as the PROBOR and the Third Cycle.
Gethal Amazonas is the only large company in the region. There is only one other saw mill operating in
the region, which is owned by Mr. Valdenor Campos da Costa and supplies lumber to the local market.
Mr. Valdenor has a partnership with Gethal in order to develop two management plans for his area of
23,800 ha. One of these plans has already been approved and, with support from Gethal, Mr. Valdenor’s
forest operation is getting ready to receive forest certification.
Besides the primary sector activities described, other economic activities of Manicoré include public
services and local trade.
Basic infrastructure services are quite limited in most counties of the region. Electricity is produced by a
diesel-electric generator with capacity to supply around 2,400 consumers (during the field evaluation
period there was a shortage of supply, i.e., “brown-out”). The town water supply service serves 1,800
people; telephone services have been installed and are operational.
Rivers are the main means of transportation, although in Manicoré and its surrounding areas there are
many cars, motorcycles and bicycles. Regular commercial boat and barge lines provide connection to
Manaus, Porto Velho and Belém. The local airport is used by small airplanes. The fastest way to
Manicoré is a one hour and 15 minute flight from Manaus.
Located on the margin of the Rio Madeira, the main in-land waterway for grain transportation in Brazil,
Manicoré offers good conditions for river transportation of different types of cargo. Soy beans produced in
Rondonia and in Chapada dos Parecis, Mato Grosso, pass by Manicoré and proceed to the Hermasa port
in Itacoatiara. This is the same route used by Gethal to send logs to its industrial processing plants in
Itacoatiara.
From a cultural point of view, Manicoré offers a number of folkloric celebrations at different times of the
year. In April there is the Açaí Festival in the Estirão Community; in August, the Honey Festival in the
community of Esperança; the Watermelon Festival in September is held in the town itself; the Flour
Festival in December is in the community of Capananziho, and the Folklore Festival in the months of June
and July, when many street parties (“forrós”) are organized in Manicoré, such as the Luzia Forró, Ruy
Silva Forró, Mazzarello Forró and many others.
Table 3. Local Population affected by the Forest Operation
____________________________________________________________________________________
Place
Type
Communities
Population and/or
Identified
number of houses
____________________________________________________________________________________
Manicoré Municipality
Municipality
-
38,919 (IBGE 1994)
Itacoatiara Municipality
Municipality
-
59.926 (IBGE 1994)
Vila Democracia and
access road to
Transamazônica
Riverside
Community
Rio Mataurá Region(*)
249 houses
(FNS, 1999)
Riverside
Community
Democracia, Terra Preta
(access road), Jatuarana,
Urucuri, vista Alegre e
Santa Eva
Ponta Natal, Biriba, Terra
Preta, Boca do Curaru
Rio Madeira Region
Riverside
Community
Genipapo União,
Curralinho
no up-to-date
information
Rio Atininga Region
Riverside
Community
Approx. 594
people
(field obs.)
____________________________________________________________________________________
Santa Marta, Preciosa,
Boa Esperança I, Nova
Vida, Espírito Santo,
São José I, Lago do Atininga
233 houses
(FNS, 1999)
Source: IBGE 94, FNS 1999
(*) Includes communities who live along the margins of the Rio Uruá, a tributary of the Rio Mataurá
1.5 Production Data
A. Species and Products
- Logs: from the forest management unit they are transported to Itacoatiara for industrial processing (white
woods and heavy woods) or for sale to the local market (heavy woods).
- Veneer and plywood: produced at the Itacoatiara plant .
The main species currently used for veneer and plywood production are the following: Copaíba (Copaifera
spp), Amapá (Brosimum parinarioides Ducke), Paricá (Schizolobium amazonicum), Paricarana (Simaruba
amara Aubl.), Marupá, Breus (Trattinickia spp), a number of Fava species (Parkia spp), Tauari Branco,
Jatobá (Hymenaea courbaril), Garrote and Guariúba (Clarisia racemosa Ruiz and Pav.).
For the production of lumber the following species are used: Angelim Pedra (Dinizia excelsa Ducke),
Maçaranduba (Manilkara huberi), Sucupira Vermelha (Diplotropis spp.), Cumarú (Dipteryx odorata Wild.),
Cedrinho and Itaúba (Mezilaurus itauba).
In the areas of Vila Democracia the only other commercial product besides wood obtained from the forest
are Brazil nuts, collected by the former owner of company areas, Mr. Antonio Duarte. Although in the
past latex from hevea trees has been produced in significant quantities, it is no longer a product of
commercial importance.
In addition, many different medicinal herbs and vines are collected by workers and members of local
communities for their own use, at subsistence levels.
B. Current and Potential Production Volumes
The company could cut up to 33 m3/ha/year, which means a total volume of 51,000 m3/year considering a
25 year cycle for the total area to be harvested, i.e., 1,560 ha/year. However, for many reasons, it will be
very difficult to reach this production volume. The company plans to produce an average of 15m3/ha
during the current year and increase production to 22.5 m3/há in the coming years. These targets shall
be reviewed in the light of market acceptance of non-traditional species now being promoted by the
company.
C. Description of current and future production and processing capacity
Current monthly production capacity (m3) :
Peeling 6,500
Drying
5,250
Plywood
3,000
Estimated future monthly production capacity (m3) :
Plywood
5,000
Sawn wood
3,000 (to be implemented in 2 years)
D. Sources of raw material/products
Volume of raw material consumed by the Itacoatiara plant (m3)
Wood Source
Gethal Forests
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000*
9,878
12,058
12,741.45
6,140
44,000
Independent Log Producer
(FSC certified)
-
-
979.44
8,813
12,000
Log Suppliers w/ For.
Mngmt. Plan or Selective
Cutting
95,461.10
73,466.40
47,292.91
50,607
42,000
Other
Log
Suppliers
(land clearing authorization)
920.50
-
200
-
-
Total
106,259.60
85,524.40
61,213.80
65,560
98,000
*Estimate
1.6 Chain of Custody
A. Products to be covered by the Chain of Custody Certification
Logs processed in the saw mill and veneer mill. Lumber sales to be included in the future.
B. Estimated yearly volume of different products
Estimate for Final Product Volume in 1999 (m3)
Product
Waterproof Plywood
1996
1997
1998
1999
8,932
11,101
-
Overlaid Waterproof Plywood
-
-
2,884
Camioplex Waterproof Plywood
-
-
Wtrproof Plwd w/ Resin Overlay
-
Platform Plywood (export)
12,543
2000*
1,684
5,160
2,769
1,698
4,800
-
814
616
800
5,320
-
5,349
12,800
Waterproof Plywood (export)
-
-
6,004
6,626
9,700
Interior Use Plwd BBCC (export)
-
-
-
618
4,344
Veneer (export)
35,172
29,268
20,151
10,114
Total
56,647
45,689
32,622
26,705
37,604
*Estimate
C. Chain of Custody Code: SW-COC-121
2. THE CERTIFICATION PROCESS
2.1. Evaluation Dates
The evaluation for pre-qualification was carried out in the period June 4 –7, 1999, and the report finalized
in July 1999. The field work necessary for the full evaluation was carried out in the period October 17 –
23, 1999. The first version of the evaluation report was completed on December 12, 1999. A second
evaluation, mainly focused on pre-conditions, was performed in the period of May 26 – 30, 2000, and the
report finalized on August 1st, 2000.
2.2. Evaluation Team
The multidisciplinary evaluation team included the following specialists:
First Full Evaluation
Lineu Wadouski, Forester, Consultant
Steve Gretzinger, Forester, The Rogue Institute
Domingos Macedo, Forester, IMAFLORA
Edson Vidal, Agronomist, Senior Researcher – IMAZON
Marcelo Carneiro, Sociologist, Federal University of Maranhão
Heidi Carvalho, Sociologist, ESALQ/USP
Second Evaluation (Pre-conditions)
Tasso Rezende de Azevedo – Forester, IMAFLORA
Edson Vidal, Agronomist, Senior Researcher – IMAZON
Kátia D. Maia, Sociologist, Consultant
2.3. Evaluation Process
A full evaluation for certification purposes consists of the following phases: i) selection of specialists that
will comprise the evaluation team; ii) consultation with stakeholders by different means (e-mail, letter,
telephone, personal interviews) with regard to the field pre-evaluation; iii) briefing the members of the
evaluation team with preliminary information; iv) meeting with members of the pre-evaluation team;
v)presentation of the company and of IMAFLORA/SmartWood; vi) workshop with stakeholders; vii) field
visits and interviews; viii) meeting with company representatives in order to discuss findings by the
evaluation team; ix) post-evaluation meeting of the members of the evaluation team; x) version 1.0 of the
evaluation report; xi) internal reviews; xii) checking of pre-conditions; xiii) post-auditing consultation with
stakeholders; xiv) internal reviews, and xv) presentation of the final version of the evaluation report.
During the whole process, the evaluation team tries to characterize the forest management of the
company and interpret it according to the philosophy of the FSC Principles and Criteria as expressed in
the document “Generic Guidelines for Assessing Forest Management” prepared by SmartWood/Rainforest
Alliance. Special attention is given to the economic, social, and environmental components of forest
management. At this stage the work of the evaluation team is based on four types of information: i) those
supplied by the company; ii) those observed during the field visits; iii) those obtained in the interviews;
and iv) those from the literature survey and press data banks.
Summary of Activities carried out
First Evaluation
Before traveling to the field the members of the evaluation team received the pre-evaluation report which
contained documents describing details of the history and forest production of the company. The
evaluation team spent five days in the Manicoré region in order to obtain information on the philosophy,
guidelines, standards and practices followed by Gethal Amazonas in carrying out its forest management,
as well as on environmental characteristics, the stage of development of the operation, and the socioeconomic and labor conditions.
Field activities were based on interviews and visits to: i) forest operation areas, including different areas
and different types of operations chosen randomly; ii) company offices in Manicoré; and iii) local
communities that are, or could be, affected by the activities of the company.
A number of meetings with stakeholders were organized in Manaus, and included IBAMA, local NGO's,
and the Wood Industry Workers Union of Itacoatiara. The team also carried out phone interviews with Mr.
Bruno Stern, Gethal President, and with directors of GMO, the corporation that is acquiring financial
control over Gethal.
Every night all members of the evaluation team got together to discuss the work done during the day and
exchange information, and to define priorities and plan the work of the next day.
Second Evaluation
The evaluation team had previously received all documents and maps explaining each of the preconditions established. On the first day of the field visit the team visited the facilities of the company in
Manicoré and proceeded to inspect the logging areas of the Democracia project.
On the second day the team interviewed members of the local population and visited additional logging
areas of the Democracia project and its areas where the 100% pre-harvesting inventory was being carried
out. On the third day part of the evaluation team held interviews in the town of Manicoré and another part
carried out inspection of areas logged in 1999.
In addition, field inspections were also carried out in areas of the Rio Mataurá region, with visits and
interviews with representatives from the local communities. The evaluation team spent one night at the
logging camp in order to take part in a internal planning meeting organized by the crew responsible for
forest management of the company.
Finally, the evaluation team held a meeting with the company people in charge of forest management in
order to discuss the fulfillment of each pre-condition and other relevant aspects of the evaluation.
2.4 Guidelines and Standards Used
The evaluation was carried out according to the SmartWood standards for the certification of natural
forests and to the FSC Principles and Criteria. Since the national FSC standards for Brazil are in their
final stages of development, they were also taken into consideration as background documentation. For
the second assessment, the standards used in the first assessment were adapted, incorporating some of
the specific criteria existent in the 7.0 version of the FSC Brazilian standards. The adapted standards are
presented in Appendix 1.
3. RESULTS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
3.1 General Discussion of Results
(1) Compliance with Laws and FSC Principles
The company is making significant investments, of both financial and human resources, in order to comply
with the FSC principles and criteria and obtain certification. A comparison between its situation in October
1999 and in July 2000 shows important improvements, especially with regard to its relationship with
workers and local communities.
Long term commitments
Presently all logging operations in Manicoré are carried out by Gethal’s own crews.
The population directly and indirectly affected by the Gethal Management operation has little knowledge of
the certification process and its significance and importance for maintaining environmental conditions at
levels adequate for local and regional socio-economic development on a sustainable basis.
Since the end of 1998 the company has assumed publicly, and also in writing, its firm commitment to work
according to FSC principles and criteria. An example of this commitment is the active participation of
Gethal in the FSC Working Group (FSC/Br GT) in charge of developing national standards for forest
management certification of highland tropical forests.
During the evaluation of the pre-conditions it was possible to observe that the company is improving its
means of communication and providing more information to workers, subcontractors, and local
communities regarding the process of certification of its forest management units (FMU’s). However, the
local communities must be more involved in the process.
Compliance with Laws
The forest management plan of the company complies with the current national and regional legislation
regarding forests and the environment in general. It has been inspected and approved by the proper
government authorities.
No legal disputes involving the forest operations of the company in the area of Manicoré, which is the
object of this evaluation, were found.
All evidence indicates that the company is current in its payment of taxes, duties and fees. This was
confirmed by the local authorities and representatives of the municipalities where the company operates.
During the field evaluation some old (1997) pending matters with IBAMA were identified. They were
related to fines applied to Gethal for discrepancies between the wood volumes reported and the
documentation about the origin of the wood (ATPF). Those fines have been appealed and in August 2000
IBAMA confirmed their cancellation and issued a statement clearing Gethal of all previous disputes.
The company has made significant efforts to assure that all of its raw material comes from managed
forests. As a result, the number of log suppliers decreased drastically and those remaining are
encouraged to improve their management plans in order to be entitled to certification, as it is the case of
Mr. Valdenor, who has forest areas adjoining the Democracia project, as already described in this report.
The company presented documents proving that it was fully up-to-date with its federal and state tax
obligations, including those with the national social security system (INSS). It also presented documents
issued by local and state courts showing its situation with respect to payments to its workers,
subcontractors and suppliers. Some of these documents contain information on pending matters related
to taxes and workers’ claims that are still under dispute. As part of the pre-conditions previously
established, the company made available a report informing the status of each of these unresolved
issues, what is being done about them, and how long it expects it will take to arrive at a satisfactory
solution.
The company administrators are aware of the main international agreements and conventions related to
forest activities, in contrast with workers and subcontractors who proved to be almost completely ignorant
of those matters.
Clarification is needed regarding the rules and restrictions to which the OMF is subject (CITES, etc.).
There were no complaints nor was there evidence of any direct or indirect involvement by Gethal in illegal
logging from the beginning of the certification process.
(2) Land Tenure and Use Rights and Responsibilities
Gethal has shown a positive attitude towards land use and acquisition processes, as well as towards its
long term commitment to forest management. Although today there are no conflicts regarding land tenure
and use rights, in view of the large areas to be bought in the near future it is necessary that the company
adopt a proper posture in order to face potential problems.
The company has excluded from its management plans an area of 3,452 ha located between the rivers
Uruá and Mataurá, which has been designated as an indian reservation area for the Mura group. That
area refers to the lots included in the FUNAI document “Description of Demarcation of Indian Land
Pinatuba” and in the Ministry of Justice Order N. 821, of December 11, 1998. Along this line, the
company has taken up the commitment of not carrying out forest management activities in any other case
involving indian land until all disputes have been settled. This positive attitude is an indication of the land
acquisition policy adopted by the company.
Gethal Amazonas has plans to buy around 100,000 ha of forest land in the region of Manicoré. The
owners and people with use rights of 76,000 ha have been identified and contacted by the company and
contact with 31 land owners/users of the remaining area is still to be made. A large number of these
people took part in the “Rubber Tree Cultivation” project, established in the late 70’s and early 80’s, and
do not live in the area anymore.
Two aspects of this land acquisition process deserve to be brought up: i) superposition of titles issued by
the Town of Manicoré with those issued by the State of Amazonas, and ii) the large area to be purchased,
involving more than 100 land owners or users with tenure rights.
The dimensions involved in this process reinforce the importance of carefully checking the titles and rights
of those that own the areas. Considering the general land tenure situation in the Amazon region and,
especially, in the State of Amazonas, it is critical that the acquisition process is based on the absolute
legality of the titles and properties, in order to prevent future claims – considering also the observations
contained in the past assessment regarding registration documents for the county.
The large number of people involved in this land acquisition process, which includes owners, holders of
land use rights, local communities and people that live in the area, may lead to conflicts. For this reason,
the company must have a clear and well defined strategy for going ahead with its plans to expand its
forest base. Even though Gethal Amazonas has shown to this date an open and conciliatory attitude in
the negotiations with dwellers, local communities, and people who base their livelihood on products
extracted from the forest, it must establish a clear policy to handle this situation.
On the other hand, it is also necessary to consider the impact that such expansion will have on the
general conditions prevailing in the municipality of Manicoré. The company will reinforce its role as the
largest enterprise of the region. The impact of this new position must be evaluated from different aspects,
especially those dealing with economic, social and political issues in order to contribute to the definition of
an adequate strategy for the company to operate in the region.
Gethal Amazonas has a harmonic relationship with the families that live in its areas. It has assumed the
commitment to recognize the land use rights of those living in its areas or in the areas it may purchase.
There are some potential conflicts at border areas (URUCURI), where the community disputes the
demarcation and pleads a larger area. Possibly, other conflicts may appear, since Gethal is conducting a
survey of its properties limits. This process needs to have the participation of a company’s employee so
that the claims and questions of the neighbors have a rapid communication channel with Gethal’s
managers. This can prevent conflicts and further problems related to land demarcation.
The company has a positive attitude towards the resolution of conflicts. It has not taken any initiative that
could be interpreted as confrontation. On the other hand, it lacks formal procedures to solve such
conflicts.
In order to deal with this issue, the company has established a partnership with Pró-Natura and with the
Amazon University Foundation (FUA), with the objective of carrying out a diagnosis of the situation of the
families living in the company areas and neighboring communities. Based on the results of this study, a
set of coordinated actions will be proposed in order to improve the quality of life of those populations.
The company maintains relative control over its areas through the presence of its employees, who seek to
keep a friendly relationship with people that live in the region. However, the evaluation team was not able
to identify the existence of surveillance and protection systems that would assure permanent control of the
areas against hunting activities, illegal logging, and invasion/colonization.
(3) Forest Management Plan and Monitoring
Gethal Amazonas has three documents that define the planning of its forest activities:
i) Pluriannual Plan for Demand and Supply of Raw Material – which details the short, medium and longterm production targets for the company (this document was prepared after the pre-certification
assessment).
ii) Management Plan – deals with management planning of existing areas (document prepared in 1996
by Richard Bruce, consultant)
iii) Logging Plan – deals with planning the activities related to logging of the areas selected for a specific
year (prepared annually)
During the second evaluation the company presented an up-to-date report explaining in detail what it is
doing to solve the pre-conditions established during the first evaluation.
The set of documents listed above gives a good description of the management objectives and of the
wood resources. Non-timber resources were initially identified as part of the pre-conditions listed in the
first evaluation (October 1999), but have not yet been incorporated into the activities of the 100% preharvesting inventory.
The management plan prepared in 1996 is the document that contains most of the details of the
silvicultural system proposed by Gethal Amazonas. In general terms this system is a selective polycycle
one, with limits on smallest diameter to be cut and a rotation of 25 years. The basic assumptions of the
silvicultural system adopted are the following:
- the canopy opening resulting from logging will facilitate regeneration;
- seed trees left behind will supply the seeds for regeneration;
- annual growth yields will increase as a result of the additional light available through
openings left by the logging operations;
- non-commercial trees of low quality may be felled or girdled in order to promote growth
of good quality trees of commercial species;
- enrichment planting may occur.
The plan includes inventory data on species composition in the different diameter classes (frequency,
basal area, volume, importance value etc.). This data had not been used in the definition of the
management strategy when the first evaluation was carried out.
On the basis of the information reviewed, field observations and conversations with Gethal foresters it is
possible to note that part of the species now considered of commercial value, and that are being logged,
are not found to regenerate naturally. This is often the case in tropical forests and it must be taken into
proper account. The management plan must include a discussion on how the company will solve this
question.
For some years the company has collected important information that could be used to evaluate the
behavior of some species from the point of view of natural regeneration. Unfortunately, due to inadequate
statistical procedures, this data cannot lead to any meaningful result. Since the experimental procedures
have been revised, the new data that is now being collected is proving to be useful in casting some light
on the regeneration conditions of some species and possibly in prescribing silvicultural treatments when
needed.
In the document prepared to solve the pre-conditions the company presented a general analysis of growth
projections for the next cycle, based on data from the inventory and from the literature. This document
presents graphic models demonstrating the distribution of different diameter classes for the main
commercial species (number of trees and volume).
During the first year of certification the company will be able to carry out a detailed analysis of the data
available, including the information from its permanent plots.
Harvesting
The management plan emphasizes logging in the dry season, recommending the directional felling of the
trees towards the low areas so that they can be removed by water during the rainy season (river
transportation). Taking into consideration that most of the area of the management unit consists of
highland forest this prescription of the management plan is not relevant. In addition, the use of skidders in
the logging operation is not discussed in full.
On the other hand, the Operational Plan (or Logging Plan) describes in more detail the operational system
on dry land, which is based on the system developed by the Tropical Forest Foundation.
The Management Plan shall be revised during the first year of the company certification in order to reflect
theses changes.
Maps
Gethal has general maps of good quality at 1:100,000 scale, which include a general listing of all of its
areas.
The company maps have been improved and those presented during the second field evaluation already
included local communities, areas of gravel extraction, and conservation and preservation areas.
Additional significant improvements may still be achieved with the implementation of the Geographic
Information System - GIS by the end of 2000.
Most noticeable is the fact that the original maps were not divided for purposes of the management plan
but rather for locating forest area in conveyance. By the time of the second evaluaion the company had
switched to maps which were divided my management unit.
A map indicating the location of the main ecosystems present in the company areas has also been
prepared.
The logging operations maps used in field activities are rudimentary but extremely functional. Due to the
fact that they are drawn from computer spreadsheets, they do not include cartographic references of the
management sites, georeferenced information or scale. On the other hand, the field teams are able to
understand them very well and effectively work with them.
The maps show large water bodies, skidding trails and log yards. Some superficial information about the
topography of the terrain, such as its slope although gentle, also is shown. Some critical areas that
deserve special attention during the rainy season (e.g.: different soil types, areas subject to flooding) have
been incorporated in the 100% inventory between the first and the second evaluation.
The adoption of GIS, programmed for 2000, should introduce significant improvements in these maps.
Local Communities
This topic had not received due consideration in the documents presented initially. There was mention of
the company’s plans to adopt a good neighborhood policy and take the necessary precautions to avoid
conflicts. However, among other aspects, there was no definition or description of local communities or
families living in company areas.
As part of the certification pre-conditions all communities and families living in the Gethal areas, or near
them, were identified and contacted and now they are clearly identified in the company’s maps. In a joint
project with the Amazon University Foundation (FUA), and the Pró-Natura Institute the company is
carrying out a detailed survey of the local communities.
Monitoring
The Management Plan includes a detail design of a system of permanent plots with the objective of
monitoring the growth of the forest through the years. Although well designed, this system needs
improvement with regard to monitoring the impact of the different silvicultural systems on regeneration,
remaining volume and biological resources.
The company has also established a system to monitor management activities, costs, performance and
productivity of field crews and manpower listing. Currently the data collected through this system is not
submitted to in-depth analysis but this situation should improve by the end of its first year in operation.
Availability of resources and training
In the field the crews have access to some operation manuals such as the Forest Management Manual
published by IMAZON, but they do not have a copy of either the management or the operational plan.
The documentation prepared by the company on the procedures for implementing forest management
activities is of good quality. Logging maps are available in the field and are amply used by the working
crews.
A significant improvement was noticed with regard to the technical capabilities of the forest workers in the
period between the first and the second evaluations (October, 1999 - May, 2000), especially in road
construction where serious problems existed.
All work teams are currently very well trained to carry out the different activities involved in forest
management. The only problem identified was in relation to the speed of implementation and production
increase. It is important that the work crews go through an adaptation period after training so that they
can increase production after having been well prepared.
Specific manuals were prepared, and adequately adapted to the conditions prevailing in Gethal’s areas,
for each one of the activities to be carried out by the crews in the field.
(4) Forest Management Practices
This was the area where improvements in forest operations between the first and the second field
evaluation were most significant.
In the first evaluation the management maps were incomplete, without clear elements of identification of
areas to be logged, legal reserves, forests along rivers, igarapés, lagoons, springs, and sites of special
interest. This deficiency in documentation resulted in poor practices such as felling in sensitive and
transition zones, with heavy equipment going into preservation areas and main roads crossing igarapés
and wetlands more than absolutely necessary.
The operational plan had to be carried out with more care, taking into account the availability of the
equipment and the operational capacity of the transportation equipment in order to avoid operational
delays and a larger network of skidding trails to cover such deficiencies. A large number of problems
observed in the field were due to abrupt changes in plans caused by equipment breakdown, lack of timely
maintenance services, and urgent need of logs by the plant. These aspects were compounded by
requiring a denser network of trails and roads, with serious deterioration of the environment.
The access ramps in the port and in the logging areas, especially around bridges, had to be better
planned to prevent erosion. In addition, drainage work had to be done alongside steep slopes and also in
areas subject to flooding.
The operational plan did not clearly consider the heavy impacts of the activities during the “winter” (rainy
season), but included them together with questions related to work safety, logistics and economics.
When the second evaluation took place eight months after the first one, significant improvements were
noticed.
Subcontracting a specialized firm to build the roads was a great advancement; it’s quite apparent that the
quality of the new roads is much better than that of the roads used in 1999. The roads used in 1999 are in
poor state of repair and shall be recuperated by the end of this year.
The company will always face a great challenge in maintaining its main roads due to a series of
unfavorable conditions: long period of heavy rains, soil types, and absence of gravel to improve the road
surface.
The company has planned logging operations in order to avoid the more rainy period of the first quarter of
the year. This period has to be adjusted every year since the use of roads during the rainy season is
highly undesirable.
Annual Cut Volume
The operational improvement of the company can be observed by the increase in productivity and
efficiency of the logging crews.
During the first evaluation it was noticed that the crew presented a number of problems in its operation
and could not reach a total volume of 1,000 m3 per month. According to the operational plan, the
expected volume to be cut per hectare was 25 m3, but no more than 14 –16 m3/ha were being produced.
One of the reasons for this low productivity was that only species adequate to veneer production were
being cut. As a consequence of such low volumes, the annual area to be logged had to be expanded,
more roads and trails had to be built and maintained, the logging crews and the planning and monitoring
teams had to cover larger distances, and the final result was lower productivity and higher costs.
The 1200% physical increase of the company’s production using its own logging teams anticipated for the
period October 1999 – December 2000 seemed to be an immense challenge due to the Amazon
environment, the maturity level of the technical-operational teams, and the availability of production and
support means in the region.
During the eight months between the first and the second evaluations, the Management Plan was revised
to cover and area of 49,120 ha out of a total area of 60,245.6 ha. The prescribed system is selective
cutting with an estimated rotation cycle of 25 years and with an annual cut of 71 species up to 26.5
m3/ha. However, in the first years only 15 m3/ha will be logged.
The estimated growth yield of the
commercial species is up to 1.1 m3/ha/y.
For the second evaluation the company has prepared a Pluriannual Supply Plan that covers the period of
1998 – 2022, a full 25-year cycle. This plan is based on the assumption that production will level off at the
rate of 145,500 m3/y which is the expected production for 2001 and includes the acquisition of 140,000
hectares of new area.
As the company increases the utilization of raw material from highland forests, the quality of the logs will
decrease in comparison with traditional flood plain species such as sumaúma, muirapitanga and copaíba.
The current conversion factor of 2:1 is expected to drop to 3,1:1 (m3 of log : m3 of processed product). A
more detailed study of the highland species may lead to industry adaptations that could reverse the
productivity decrease just mentioned. In the near future it will be difficult for society to accept the fact that
the manufacture of a given product generates more residues than the product itself. This means that the
conversion factor of 3:1 requires larger areas of forests to compensate the loss of raw material; this may
not be acceptable since the forest resource may be renewable but it is not unlimited.
In the field the company had an enormous operational advance, with large gains in the productivity of its
crews. In the month of July 2000 a total of 4,000 m3 were logged. The operational planning for 10,000
ha, including the 100% pre-harvesting inventory, was established and is now underway. With financial
resources provided by GMO, the new major shareholder of the company, it was possible to put new
machinery into operation including four skidders, one steel track tractor, two front-end loaders, one
lubrication truck, two trucks and flat beds and two four-wheel drive Toyota pick-ups. In addition, radio
communication equipment and other items necessary to consolidate the company’s operational capacity
were also purchased.
Silvicultural Prescriptions
A. Canopy opening in order to facilitate regeneration
The company’s foresters believe that the canopy opening resulting from felling is sufficient to stimulate
adequate regeneration. On the other hand, the fact that “regeneration” by itself does not necessarily
mean that the commercial species that are being removed will be the ones to regenerate is not clearly
understood. A preliminary study on this subject is being carried out by Gethal. The post-harvesting
survey carried out in the module Lagoinha is of a particular interest since monitoring of regeneration that
is occurring in openings (log yards, skidding trails, etc.) will give some idea of the light requirements of
commercial species. The results of this study shall be carefully analyzed and used to develop specific
silvicultural treatments.
B. Seed trees
The Management Plan virtually ignores the protection of seed dispersing trees, or even the establishment
of desired minimum limits for them. On the other hand, it was observed that a considerable number of
seed dispersing trees were left standing in the field. For example, the review of the data of the 111 ha of
Stand A of the Democracia project shows that only 553 (51%) of the 1003 commercial trees available for
logging were in effect felled. Out of the remaining trees, 189 (18.8%) were left behind because of the low
quality of their bole, 87 (8.7%) were in protected areas and 174 (17.3%) were left as seed dispersing
trees.
In terms of the number of individuals, apparently Gethal is leaving an adequate number of seed dispersing
trees. The observation on the maps reveals that the spatial distribution of the trees is also satisfactory.
What is not clear yet is the composition of the seed dispersing trees in the forest. The data is included in
the maps but it must be analyzed and summarized.
During the 100% inventory information was obtained on various parameters. These included the intrinsic
characteristics of each tree such as quality of the bole and crown, and occurrence of hollow center (heart
rot). This information is useful in determining the felling of commercial trees; for example, in stand B of
block A, the initial plan was for felling 1614 trees but in the end only 807 were cut (50%). From this point
of view planning of the logging operations could be improved to allow for compensation of those trees that
were not felled with others of the same species.
C. Annual Growth
Gethal is carrying out regeneration studies through permanent plots and the evaluation of post-harvesting
impact. This reflects a serious approach to the theme.
D. Liberation Treatments
Gethal does not plan to eliminate trees of non-commercial species as a general practice to encourage
regeneration of commercial species. This is a cautious approach, since not only unnecessary impacts
could result from liberation practices but also because some species that are not accepted by the market
today could become quite valuable in the future. Gethal is still in the process of defining a strategy for
liberation felling.
E. Enrichment Planting
Few enrichment plant experiments have met with success in tropical regions. Failure is due mainly to the
high costs of keeping the seedlings out of the competition of understory vegetation. Although Gethal has
included this option in its management plan, it has not put it into practice in the field.
Inventory
The company is carrying out the system of continuous inventory and the system of evaluating postharvesting impacts. As mentioned in item 3 (Management Plan), some adaptations are required in order
to increase their level of consistency.
Roads and Trails
Until 1999 roads and trails were being opened at the same time logging operations were taking place;
this practice resulted in significant damage to the environment. The situation was even more serious due
to the fact that the company’s forest areas are located in one of the regions with highest precipitation in
the Amazon and also because of the soil conditions, characterized by a high clay content.
Gethal has recently subcontracted a specialized firm to build new roads and expand its previous network
so they can be used in the dry period (“Summer”) of 2000 and the whole year of 2001. A total of 54 km of
main and secondary roads will be built, which will result in better log hauling conditions for the next year.
Other improvements are related to the interconnection of log yards through skidding trails, now being
called pre-skidding. This activity is planned for the most critical period of the company’s operation, i.e., in
the beginning and in the end of the rainy season. Another positive development is that two new roads are
being planned in the Mataurá region to connect the logging areas directly with the margins of the Madeira
river.
Harvesting
The logging teams are well trained and qualified to carry out this activity. The training programs organized
in 2000 helped to improve the technical level of their members.
All trees to be felled are identified, marked and numbered. The evaluation of this item would have
received maximum score if the company had available illustrated field manuals to be used by workers and
supervisors, describing the procedures of the FMP.
Most of the remaining trees and seed dispersing trees are marked, but there is no identification to allow
the distinction of one as compared to the other. For this reason, during the skidding operation seed
dispersing trees are not recognized as such.
A number of damaged trees were observed mainly due to the length of the logs being pulled and also due
to the small radius of curvature of skidding trails and access roads.
Permanent preservation areas (PPA) are being marked in the field in order to prevent any type of forest
operation in these areas. One of the places from where gravel is being extracted is located within the
limits of a PPA.
Skidding is done with the skidder grapple lifting the base of the log. In exceptional cases a short steel
rope is used to bring the log to an area where the skidder can get access to it.
(5) Environmental Impacts and Biological Conservation
(see also 4.0)
In a certified FMO, environmental protection and biological conservation include a combination of proactive as well as protective measures. Pro-active measures may include efforts to increase the level of
biological diversity of the landscape under management, or activities geared towards the recomposition of
the ecosystem. Protective measures are intended to make sure that all employees and subcontractors
are aware of sensitive areas and take the adequate measures to avoid problems.
The analysis of environmental impacts and of conservation measures also takes into consideration the
analysis at the operational level and at the landscape level.
At the landscape level the company has prepared a map showing the mains ecosystems present in the
area and defined the areas of absolute conservation which include the different ecosystems and represent
about 5% of the total area. To these conservation areas the company added all the permanent
preservation areas along the water bodies and springs. As the 100% inventory is carried out, other areas
are being incorporated as conservation areas due to their topography and/or low forest productivity. All
these areas have been incorporated in the maps prepared by the company.
The company makes a 100% survey of all species with DBH above 35 cm in the pre-harvesting inventory.
However, there is no system in place to monitor fauna, but a research project on this subject is being
considered in partnership with the Federal University of the Amazon – FUA. With regard to non-timber
products, the company has tried to identify among those surveyed, the species with greater potential.
Specific management strategy will be established for the species identified as most relevant according to
a survey now underway in cooperation with local communities.
Rare species
No threatened flora species are being utilized; however, there is no special attention given to fauna
species.
The company has not carried out specific studies to determine any endemic or rare character of the
species surveyed in the 100% inventory. A simple classification of species per diameter classes could
help to determine which species are represented by very few trees and, therefore, suggest silviculture
treatments to encourage their regeneration.
When the company adopts adequate measures to protect PPA’s it is avoiding disturbing the species that
occur in those specific ecosystems. However, it is also necessary to refine the procedures used in
selecting species. Today some parameters are chosen in order to select which trees should be felled:
species, DBH, bole quality, and seed dispersing trees. In addition, species with less than 20 trees per
annual compartment are not logged. Measures to protect these species shall be defined until 2001.
Exotic species, biological control agents and chemicals
The company does not make any use of exotic species, biological control agents or genetically modified
organisms.
No use of chemicals was observed in the management area, not even to treat the wood used in
construction. The main aspect related to the use of chemicals refers to their transportation, storage and
utilization of fuels and lubricants. The reduction in their use must be accomplished by eliminating wastage
during transportation and storage, maximum production for each unit of fuel used and recycling of
lubricants.
In general the residues of logging activities are disposed properly, but a few cases of non-biodegradable
materials left behind in the forest were found. Although not frequent, these cases must be eliminated.
(6) Community Relations and Workers Rights
The activities now being established by Gethal in Manicoré produce distinct effects depending on the
social group under consideration. A first approach is to divide these groups into two blocks: the internal
public (the company workers) and the external public (the communities). The external public can be
further classified into: a) people living in the area of influence of the blocks to be logged (region near the
project Democracia, Mataurá region, Atininga region, and the Madeira region) ; b) civil society and the
municipal public sector, whose dynamics are centralized in the town of Manicoré, the seat of the municipal
government.
6.1. Community relations
Until the time of the first evaluation of the certification process (October 1999), there was no survey based
on reliable scientific methodology focusing on the families and communities in the areas affected by the
company’s forest activities. In addition, the company did not have a clear policy to orient its
communication and relationship with those people.
Gethal did not have a professional, or a group of professionals, with specific skills to carry out this task,
although it showed a degree of awareness toward the subject as it tried to take some actions to benefit the
communities, but not in a systematic way (e.g.: supplying wood, assisting with management plans etc.)
During the second evaluation a change for the better was noticed. The company is taking steps to
improve its relations with the external public, in particular with the communities of its area of influence.
One of the first of these steps was contracting the services of the Instituto Brasileiro de Pesquisas e
Estudos Ambientais – Pró-Natura, from Rio de Janeiro, in order to carry out a series of activities related to
the social strategy of the company, beginning with a participatory diagnosis of the communities affected
by its forest activities.
Gethal has great hopes that with the work of Pró-Natura and that of a recently hired social worker it will be
able to adequately develop its social strategy. It also hopes that these activities will generate the
information necessary for setting up an action plan that will contribute to the sustainable socio-economic
development of the municipality of Manicoré.
The planned activities to be carried out by Pró-Natura include: information survey (bibliography,
legislation, etc.), research on the socio-economic and institutional framework of the region; discussions
with Gethal employees; participatory rapid diagnostic (DRP); systematization, consolidation and analysis
of DRP data; presentation of results to Gethal and to the community; and proposal of a program and
actions aimed at the promotion of sustainable development.
In addition to the work with Pró-Natura, Gethal is negotiating an agreement with the Amazon University
Foundation (FUA) within the Pilot Program for the Protection of Tropical Forests in Brazil (PPG7) through
the Project to Promote Sustainable Forest Management in the Legal Amazon (PróManejo). This project
encompasses a survey of the communities in order to obtain information regarding the following: land
property rights, the family, means of subsistence, main extractivism products, and their expectations
regarding the Management Plan.
The positive attitude of the company in making efforts to build its social strategy and its intention that this
process receive inputs from the communities are quite clear. However, it must be cautious about
superposition of initiatives and also about the time necessary to implement them.
A relevant observation regarding the communities affected by the company’s forest activities refers to log
production cycles. Both groups, workers and communities, are not too sure about what will happen during
the period between harvests, when the logged areas are left to recuperate. It is necessary that adequate
strategies be adopted in order to encourage the political, social and economic dynamics of the
communities, independently of a constant productive activity of the company in the region.
Still with regard to the external public, but now focusing on the township of Manicoré in particular, the
company has tried to establish contacts with local leaderships in order to explain the current certification
process to the population, the initiatives to improve the relations with communities, as well as the process
of acquisition of new forest areas.
Employment opportunities for local manpower
The company has been using local manpower in its logging and tree planting activities, which resulted in
the creation of a significant number of jobs with pay above the minimum wage. In addition to salaries,
which are considered reasonably good for the region, the workers have access to some fringe benefits
such as basic staple goods and medicine.
However, during the public audiences some dissatisfaction was shown with regard to the fact that for the
more specialized work positions the company had brought manpower from Itacoatiara, as it was the case
of the agriculture technicians who used to be part of Gethal staff there. This is understandable because
the region, as most places in the Amazon, lacks specialized workers. The company has established a
permanent training and recycling program for its workers in order to improve this situation.
Community Relations and its Influence on Planning
Gethal did not conduct previous consultation with the communities that were going to directly or indirectly
be affected by its forest activities. On the other hand, it is possible to notice that the relations between
company employees and members of the local communities visited are cordial and friendly. This
favorable situation may be interpreted as the result of a deliberate decision by the company to promote an
environment of cooperation, and it is always ready to assist the communities in solving their problems, and
also as a consequence of the fact that most of the workers come from the Itacoatiara/Manicoré region, so
they are ready to establish friendships with the local population.
During the first evaluation, especially during the public consultation, it became apparent that there was
little or no knowledge from the part of the communities about the company, the planning of its activities for
the region, and the certification process. Along the same vein, the communities were not aware of the
expansion plans of the company which could have a significant impact on the dynamics of land tenure in
the region.
In the beginning of 2000 Gethal took the initiative of creating a communication channel with the
communities that may be directly or indirectly affected by its forest activities by hiring a technician
specialized in community relations. After a few months of efficient work, this person has begun to be
recognized by those communities as the spokesman for the company.
The relations between company workers and the communities located in its areas of influence where
logging activities are taking place, especially Vila Democracia, have been intensified mainly due to the
increased utilization of local manpower.
The company has opted for carrying out a detailed study of the communities in its area of influence,
including the elaboration of a participatory diagnosis, before defining its specific strategy for the region.
The work that is being done by the newly hired social worker has already improved communication with
the local population.
However, this initiative does not mean that the communities have an opportunity to participate in the
planning of the forest management or even that they have a broader knowledge of the certification
process. This higher level of involvement and understanding about the company’s activities shall be
achieved as the work in the social area is developed.
Taking into consideration the expansion of the activities of the company, it is of fundamental importance
that a strategy for communication with the communities and for their participation be defined and adopted
before logging activities begin in the new areas. Such strategies require previous studies and diagnoses.
Access to non-timber forest products
Brazil nuts are the only product gathered on a commercial scale by the local population in company areas.
The company issues selective permission for the extraction of non-timber forest products. According to
information received during the visit to the Rio Mataurá area, for the 1998/1999 crop the company
delegated the responsibility to control the access to the nut producing areas to a nut trader, Mr. Antonio
Duarte, who then charged a fee of 20% to people collecting this product. For the 1999/2000 crop the
company is signing an agreement with a former dweller of the area.
Through the contract signed with Pró-Natura and the PróManejo agreement with FUA, the company is
starting a number of surveys to learn more about its physical environment and characterize the utilization
of non-timber products by the local communities.
Until the results of these surveys are available to orient the definition of a general policy on the subject,
the company intends to adopt a conservative attitude, based on communication with the communities so
that conflicts are avoided and the applicable laws are obeyed.
It must be stressed that this subject is of high priority to the relations between the company and the
communities due to its potential as economic alternatives for the local population, as well as its
contribution to the natural resources conservation process. However, the company must give preference
to alternatives where the utilization of the resources is made through direct access of the populations to
the producing areas rather than putting them under the orders of middlemen.
Once a policy regarding this type of activity is defined and adopted, the company should find ways of
making it known to the communities affected by it. Until completion of the studies and surveys, the
company has adopted an interim policy for the subject whereby access to non-timber forest resources can
only be obtained with its formal authorization.
Compensation in case of loss or damage
The company has shown a positive attitude in repairing any damage caused by its activities, as well as in
mitigating the impacts caused by road construction in the Democracia module. In this module the
company is building a new house for the people that lived on the other side of the road, so that they do not
have to cross the road in the rainy season when traffic conditions become poor.
It is still not possible to identify the more significant impacts caused by the company’s activities. As the
company establishes a closer relationship and a permanent communication channel with the communities
it will be easier to identify possible damages.
Negative Cultural Impacts
The company has eliminated the areas designated, or claimed to be designated, as indian land from its
forest management. The company recognizes the land tenure rights of isolated or groups of families and
also of the population of some villages existing in its areas.
In some instances forest management activities cause significant impacts, such as the traffic of heavy
equipment near the houses of Vila Democracia and the access to the river port which blocks the passage
of pedestrians. On the other hand, the coordinators of field activities have demonstrated concern with
interfering the least possible in the daily life of the communities. The fact that many company workers are
also member of the local communities is of great help in facilitating interaction with the company.
A more detailed study on the impacts caused by the company’s activities on the local communities has not
been carried out due to the short time that the company has established itself in the area. However, the
participatory rural diagnosis now underway shall bring the first evaluations on the subject.
6.2 Relations with workers
With respect to the creation of jobs in the municipality of Manicoré it is important to stress the local pattern
of economic activities. The local economy is concentrated in agricultural and extractivist activities carried
out by family units, plus a small scale trading sector and the public sector. The region has a long history
of extraction of natural products from the forest, such as latex, pau-rosa and Brazil nuts. A new source of
employment in town is the construction of a base for the SIVAM project which current provides about 100
temporary work positions.
Gethal Amazonas came to Manicoré in 1997 and today it is the largest formal employer of the region, with
69 people working in its operations. Of this total, 60 workers come from the municipality of Manicoré and
from Vila Democracia next to the logging areas. According to the jobs they perform, the workers are
divided as follows: 20 people in logging activities; 20 in forest inventory; 17 in tree planting; 1 at the river
barge, and 2 in administration.
According to the information given by its administrators, when the company was established in the region
it faced serious problems in hiring local personnel because many of the candidates did not have the
necessary personal documents. This shows the grave deficiencies of the municipality with regard to basic
public services such as education and the processing of civil and professional documents, among others.
The company took upon itself to go after the missing documentation of all of its employees, such as birth
certificates, identification cards, military service papers, etc. Today all company employees have their
work papers in good order, being hired under the CLT regime which assures them rights such as a paid
vacation, 13th salary, etc. as guaranteed by federal working laws. According to information supplied by
the company, during the rainy season (“winter” months), when forest operations come to a halt, workers
are re-allocated to other areas like equipment maintenance and replacement, or are covered by the
flextime system.
Work safety conditions are also being improved. Short courses and training events continue to be
organized and it is unusual for a worker to be caught without his individual protection equipment, except
for ear protection in some cases. This shows the importance for the company to keep its pressure and
control on the use of PPE’s. New short and long distance communication radios have been purchased in
order to facilitate communication between the central office and the field crews. A four-wheel drive Toyota
pick-up truck was also purchased which shall improve the quality of the transportation of the workers.
Although there is no formal mechanism for conflict resolution and for dialogue with workers, in the main
logging camp a meeting is organized every Wednesday evening in order to discuss a number of subjects:
safety equipment that needs to be replaced; improvement in the conditions of the camp; harmony in
workers’ relations; menu to be suggested to the nutritionist; work improvement suggestions; flextime; time
clock location, and many others. One of the members of the evaluation team who took part in one of
these meetings found out that this is an interesting mechanism to build up social relationship standards
for a large group of people who spend most of their time away from their families and friends. In addition,
these meetings also contribute to the education and training of the workers.
It is worth mentioning an observation commonly made by older workers interviewed by the evaluation
team: they are quite impressed with the speed and the scope of the changes they are experiencing in
trying to keep pace with the company’s activities. Their common opinion is that their professional
conditions have improved. On the other hand, they feel the pressure caused by the speed with which the
whole process is taking place.
A question to be solved in the future is how the company will act when the occasion comes for changing
the composition of its staff, with the objective of offering some kind of support to the professional reorientation of workers that leave the company.
Salary and other benefits
According to information obtained from the workers, their union, and Gethal itself, the company has
complied with all commitments included in the Collective Work Agreement signed between Gethal and the
union that represents its workers (Union of the Carpenters, and Workers of the Furniture Industry, Saw
Mills, Carpentry Shops, Cooperage Industries, Plywood and Veneer Industries, Particle Board and
Fiberboard Industries of Itacoatiara).
Officially the Union covers only Itacoatiara workers, but the benefits agreed upon are also extended to
Manicoré workers. The base salary of the company is higher than that of the general wood industry and
the workers receive additional pay for harsh working conditions (insalubrity) and also according to the size
of their families (family additional). However, the company does not have a plan for work positions, work
functions and salaries (PCCS); in some cases people working in apparently similar jobs receive different
salaries.
Working hours are well defined and a time clock is used in the field operations. Overtime is duly
accounted for. A flextime system was established in the current year in order to accommodate workers
that become inactive during the rainy season, without loss of salary or workers rights. Weekly rest periods
are defined and observed by workers.
Health
In order to offer a health assistance program to its workers, Gethal has signed an agreement with the
Health Unit of the municipality (SUS) which is based at the local hospital. Whenever asked, the company
supplies fuel and products required for the daily operation of the hospital. The company contributes with
80% of all expenses with medicines, a benefit that also covers the members of the family of the worker.
More serious health problems that cannot be solved in Manicoré are referred to Itacoatiara, with all
expenses paid by the company. As part of the hiring process all workers are submitted to clinical exams
such as blood, feces and urine tests. However, these exams are not offered on a regular, periodical
basis.
Camps
Today logging activities are concentrated in the Democracia Module. A logging camp has been recently
established but still presents some inadequacies, especially with regard to lodging. New dormitory trailers
are supposed to be delivered in the month of August , which will contribute to the comfort of the workers.
They will be equipped with bunk beds, electric fans, and closets for the workers to put away their personal
belongings. The kitchen is ample and the lunch room is well ventilated. A new industrial stove and a
freezer have been purchased. New closets equipped with doors are being made for storing food.
Elevated water reservoirs have been installed to provide water for the kitchen and showers. The toilets
are latrine type and one of them has been fitted with a regular toilet seat. One of the main problems in the
logging camp are the mosquitoes that fiercely attack people in the evening. Hygiene conditions are
satisfactory. Some problems were detected with regard to the selective collection of garbage. The
refectory is equipped with a video and a TV connected to a dish antenna.
The food served in the logging camps is of good quality. Three meals are offered daily. The menu is
being revised by a nutritionist. The main problem is breakfast, defined initially by the activities and which
later proved to be too low in calories for the tasks they perform.
In general hygiene conditions of the camps are satisfactory. In the Democracia camp the technicians are
implementing a selective collection of garbage. When entering the dormitory the workers leave their boots
and their slippers outside. In the Mataurá the conditions around the camp are not favorable because the
vegetation is too close and the presence of wood debris nearby may serve as a hiding place for poisonous
animals such snakes and spiders.
The drinking water served at the camps as well as in the field is of good quality. Each crew brings a
water container to the logging site. The crew leaders bring some emergency medicine with them such as
pain killers and stomach medicine, among others.
Some of the company’s workers are still illiterate. According to information received from the technicians,
some alternatives are being discussed with respect to starting an alphabetization course in the logging
camps. Alphabetization is to be understood as the capacity one has to write and to understand what he
has written. This is a basic condition for the employee to have access to professional development and to
improve the safety conditions of his place of work.
Safety
According to the reports presented by the workers union, and as also observed in the company files, great
progress has been made in the field of work safety at Gethal. The subject of work safety is supervised by
three work safety specialists from the Gethal headquarters in Itacoatiara who come to Manicoré once a
month. They conduct conferences and classes on work safety and demonstrate the proper use of
personal protective equipment (PPE’s), delegating the responsibility for enforcing their use to the
supervisors.
The main work safety recommendations and standards are followed by the company, especially with
regard to the use of PPE’s. There is a permanent training program in order to provide constant updates
on the subject. The logging camps are equipped with first aid kits and with communication radios. As
mentioned before, the crews bring some first aid medicines with them such as pain killers, stomach
medicine, band-aids.
The company has implemented the Internal Commissions of Accident Prevention (CIPA’s) which is now in
full operation. The SESMET is being implemented, but the Occupational Health Medical Control Program
(PMCSO) and the Environmental Risks Prevention Program (PPRA) have not been implemented yet.
OIT Conventions 87 and 98
No factors characterizing non compliance to OIT Conventions 87 and 98 were observed in the company’s
operations. The wood workers union is located in Itacoatiara and legally it does not cover the workers in
Manicoré.
Specific Criteria established by the FSC Brazilian WG
The transportation of workers is done in appropriate vehicles; there are no minors between the ages of 14
and 18 working for the company. The only woman that is part of the logging crew is the cook; in the case
of pregnancy the legal procedures regarding maternity leave with pay are strictly followed.
With respect to union work representation, Gethal recognizes the Itacoatiara union as responsible for the
areas of Manicoré since there is no local union. However, the Wood Workers Union of Itacoatiara is
planning to set up a branch in Manicoré.
(7) Benefits from the Forest and Economic Viability
Between October 1999, when the first evaluation took place, and June 2000, time of the second
evaluation, Gethal greatly expanded its operational capacity. Heavy investments were made in
equipment, human resources and training which resulted in marked gains in efficiency and economies of
scale. The company’s operational capacity jumped to 4,000 m3 per month in May 2000, which represents
an increase in excess of 300%, with better quality products and lesser environmental impacts than those
of the previous operation.
The company has prepared a revised plan to include the following information: log production estimates,
volume per hectare for the main commercial and potential species, ratio between number of trees
inventoried and those select to be felled, estimates of rotation cycle and forest growth yields (see also
3.2.iii and 3.3.), volumes programmed to supply the industrial processing demands (1990 to 2002),
monthly program of activities for the years 2000 and 2001, defining the size and number of work crews
and equipment needed to carry out the programmed activities, and finally, an estimate of new equipment
needs and increased work crew numbers.
In addition, the company also prepared a study detailing how its current forest areas are going to be
utilized and the future needs for acquiring new areas to comply with the programmed 25-year cycle.
Some premises of the study are:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Areas of permanent preservation and conservation amount to barely 18.5% -- the figures from other
forestry operations, certified or seeking certification, show that this percentage tends to be greater
when a complete (100% inventory) mapping is done which includes water courses and land with no
economic logging potential.
An estimated 22.5 m3/ha of as yet untouched logs (sawmill and rollmill) will be available to furnish
milled lumber to the other companies (12,000 m3 annually) once certification is obtained.
A conversion factor of 3.1 m3 of logs to 1 m3 of plywood. This is a conservative estimate based on
average log diameter (less than the flood plain species traditionally used in the plywood and veneer
industries), and there is a need to increase the number of species used
Postpone the sale of veneer until the end of 2000, concentrating on the production of plywood, which
will increase the profitability of veneer.
Annual production of 48,000 m3 of plywood until the end of 2001 (converted from 145,500 m3 of logs)
Continued supply from independent log producers (54,000 m3 in 2000 and 40,000 m3 in subsequent
years), primarily from three large suppliers. One of these suppliers is certified; the other two are
interested in certification
Four production areas of it own are being considered: the Democracia project (in the process of
becoming certified), the Searihã project (started in 2000), the Vale + Primavera project (to begin in
2005) and another new area to be acquired (to begin in 2006).
Current costs per cubic meter of wood produced by the company and delivered at the plant are compatible
with those of logs bought from independent producers.
The company also presented an annual financial and operational plan for the years of 2000 and 2001,
including all costs, income and investment needs. The financial plan (budget) has been formally approved
by GMO, the largest shareholder of the company, which gave a green light to all investments
programmed.
Utilization of lesser-known and more abundant species
Many of the species used by Gethal could be considered lesser-known species in the international market.
In fact, the company has a relatively long list of commercial or potentially commercial species. Although a
good number of species that have been used in the past for veneer and plywood production are still being
used, field observations indicate that an ample variety of species could be utilized. Along the same line,
Gethal plans to continue to develop a market for other species.
In addition, Gethal is carrying out its own testing with different species in order to evaluate their
technological properties and their suitability for its line of products. The company has arrived at the
conclusion that research done in this area by universities and research laboratories are quite useful but
they do not answer specific questions that are important to Gethal.
Although the production capacity of its processing plant is quite solid in terms of quality and quantity, the
company plans to install a new press to manufacture special products and a veneer joining machine to
improve product recovery and quality. It also plans to install a saw mill to process additional species,
mainly those of high density which are not suitable for veneer manufacture, and also low quality logs.
Residue Minimization
A remarkable development is Gethal’s decision to start changing its line of products in order to increase
the efficiency of the utilization of its raw material resource. Production of veneer for export will be phased
out because the highland species are not suitable for the production of high quality veneer for the
international market. Gethal will concentrate all its efforts in plywood production and also in the production
of lumber, which is a new product for the company. The combined production of plywood and lumber will
result in a more efficient utilization of a greater number of species and a wider variety of log sizes.
When residues associated with logging operations are considered, Gethal has not taken any initiative to
recuperate wood from large branches or bifurcations. However, given the large transportation distances,
the company probably could not afford to pay for the costs involved in this utilization. At this point in time,
it seems that the best Gethal can do is to avoid felling defective trees, which can be done by checking the
tree before it is felled. Also, as observed in the field after the training program offered by TFF, the wood
produced from each tree can be maximized by lowering the height of the stump, and not leaving crooked
logs in the yard.
It should be noted that Gethal brings residues from its plant in Itacoatiara to the logging camps in
Democracia to improve the conditions of the loading platforms. This is a good example of using residues
that otherwise would have to be burned. In the future these residues will be used in a co-generation plant
to produce electricity.
(8) Chain of Custody
This principle refers specifically to the ability of track logs from the forest to the processing plant. The
revision of COC compliance at the processing plant is covered by the Chain of Custody system of the
plant itself.
The company has established an integrated chain of custody system to track the flow of logs from its
forest to the plant. The starting point of the system is the existence of maps where the trees are identified.
Each one of the 25 cutting units is fragmented into smaller units of 6.25 ha each.
As part of the pre-harvesting inventory, all tree species with DBH greater than 35 cm are identified by a
number, location (through a coordinate system), species, diameter class, position in the canopy, and log
quality. Primary and secondary roads are also located on the map. The field data collectors use a field
sheet with vertical and horizontal lines in order to register the exact location of each tree and at the same
time they check the coordinates being assigned to each tree.
The data is processed in Itacoatiara and returns to the field so that the power saw operator can localize
the trees to be felled. The operator registers in his copy of the map which trees have been felled; this
information is later added to the main map at the logging camp. The remaining trees are classified as
good, hollow, low quality, or protected for environmental reasons (e.g.: seed dispersing tree or permanent
preservation area – PPA). This system shows exactly which trees were felled and why the remaining
trees were spared. Each tree number also corresponds to a volume information obtained during the preharvesting inventory which could be used to generate information on the total volume logged.
The forms have been designed (and are being improved) to track the internal flow of the wood through
the different phases of the harvesting process. In its present format, the system uses one form for the
logging operation and another for log transportation. During logging, information on the exact location of
the unit chosen, and on the felled trees, are registered according to the system mentioned above: each
tree and its location (stand/block/sub-block). The original tree number is registered for the purpose of
felling and skidding. A relation number is used then to document volume. In summary, the system makes
it easier to determine how much wood was removed from each area, including information on the volume
of each tree. The forms used for transportation contain information on the log number (cross-checked
with the logging forms), species, volume, and transportation on primary and secondary roads and by
barge.
Other sources non-certified
Since Gethal buys most of its wood from independent loggers, it is a critical point that the company
correctly mark its own logs in order to make them visually distinct from the non-certified logs.
Another question is related to the purchase of wood of illegal origin. As previously discussed, a survey
carried out by Greenpeace based on official government documents, such as bills of lading and sales
invoices, showed that Gethal had been fined because it bought illegal wood from three suppliers.
Today Gethal does not have any pending matters with IBAMA with relation to previous fines or raw
material sources and no fine has been applied since the company started the certification process. In
general terms Gethal will have to buy about an extra 40,000 m3/y from external sources. This is certainly
a big problem: Operations certified by SmartWood cannot buy wood from illegal origin.
Since 1999 the company has been reducing the number of its independent suppliers and plans to finish
this year with only two or three of them who have management plans well defined and into operation.
Since Gethal started its certification process in 1998 there were no allegations of it buying wood from
illegal origin.
(9) Maintenance of High Value Conservation Forests
This principle is being currently discussed by FSC, so its consideration and analysis here takes into
account the perception of the certification team on the subject. A more complete analysis shall be carried
out during monitoring activities.
In general terms the principle defines that any area can be considered as having high conservation value
if at least one of its attributes, either from an ecological, economical, cultural or social point of view, can
be identified as having a special value. These areas are not excluded from forest management but they
should be managed in such way as to assure the preservation of those attributes that make them high
conservation value areas.
Two adjacent areas may be considered of high conservation value for different reasons and if they present
a zone of superposition where two or more attributes overlap, extra care should be taken in their
management.
Another type of analysis to be considered is that of the maps prepared during the Macapá Consultation,
held in 1999 in the State of Amapá, where specialists from various fields decided upon the priority
conservation areas for the Amazon region. These maps also present recommendations on land use and
management of each area surveyed.
At the regional landscape level, the region of Manicoré where the company operations are located is
considered on the Macapá maps as an extremely important region for fowl, mammals, and aquatic biota,
and of great importance to environmental services and of high priority for the creation of conservation
units.
It is expected that the company will take special care in complying with the specific
recommendations of the Macapá Consultation. The company must also consider in its expansion plans
the possibility of new conservation units being established in the region.
At the management unit level, the company has established “a priori” the preliminary criteria for the
definition of high conservation value areas, as suggested by the field evaluation carried out in the process
of obtaining certification.
Basically, areas/sites are identified as being of high conservation value when there are indications that a
given area presents some singular attribute as compared to the predominant forest types prevailing in the
region. Different floristic composition, presence of rare or unusual plant species, importance as shelter
and/or mating area for fauna species, such as bird nesting are examples of singular attributes.
Normally this identification must be made during the 100% pre-harvesting inventory. In this case the
areas are marked in the maps as they are being identified. Depending on the attribute under
consideration, it must be clearly marked in the field with adequate signs indicating access restrictions.
The company intends to take special measures to protect the identified attribute and also of the
neighboring forests. As an example, actions will be taken to protect a giant vine found in stand 4 and the
trees that support it.
In the case of forest types that occur in low frequencies, such as the capinaranas or open forests, in
addition to including representative samples in the absolute preservation areas, logging in these
ecosystems must have a lower intensity and should leave lower commercial value species normally
harvested in other areas. In the case of bird nesting areas, the previous criterion should be applied or the
areas should be incorporated in absolute preservation areas.
3.2. Certification Decision
Gethal Amazonas S.A. presents a good overall performance and shows continuous improvements in the
areas regarding environmental, social and silvicultural techniques. It underwent deep changes since the
beginning of its certification process in 1998, especially in the period October 1999 – May 2000. It has
complied with strong pre-conditions and clearly demonstrated its capacity to face the challenges that
certainly will come with further development of its forest management. Based on this evaluation the
assessment team recommends the certification of Gethal Amazonas S.A. as a Well Managed
Forest, pending the compliance with the pre-conditions previously established and a commitment for
compliance with the conditions listed in this report. SmartWood Headquarters after reviewing the
assessment report and peer review comments concurred with the assessment team and approved the
certification.
3.3 Pre-Conditions and Conditions
The pre-conditions are actions that the forestry operation must comply with before it can
be certified. The conditions are actions that will be part of the certification contract and to
which Gethal must comply within the timeframes established for each one of them. The
non-compliance of conditions may lead to termination of the company’s certification.
Pre-conditions: Five pre-conditions were listed in the second assessment. The preconditions of the first assessment (28 in total) are in Appendix 3. All the pre-conditions of
the first and second assessment have been complied with by the company.
Reference
Number
Pre-conditions
Corresponding
Criterion
1.
ƒ
Present a list of the pending issues in the compliance certificates,
containing a brief history with the respective measures taken and those
still to be taken and the timeframes for their execution.
1.3
2.
ƒ
Conduct a topographic survey of the perimeter areas of the Democracia
project. List the neighboring areas, reinforce and consolidate border lines
with third parties. Develop a written record for the areas that are
registered in the public’s notary.
3.
•
Present a schedule that includes the recuperation, until the end of 2000, of
all roads and yards of compartments logged and damaged by activities in
the 1999 and 2000 rainy season.
4.
ƒ
Identify on the maps all the families and/or communities that live in the
company’s and/or neighboring areas.
5.
•
Define and publicize the company’s policy regarding the access to non
2.1
4.5
6.0
6.4, 6.3
timber forest products, guaranteeing that the traditional mechanisms of
workers exploitation are not perpetuated.
Certification conditions: During the second assessment 44 conditions were listed. These conditions
must be complied with within the timeframe stated, after the company’s certification. The conditions of the
first assessment are in appendix 4.
Ref.
Number
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
Condition
Time
Criterion
Create and initiate the implementation of a training program on the
company’s certification process, including communities, for the
diffusion of FSC’s Principles and Criteria on the long term.
Promote to employees, contractors and the population in the areas
of influence of the FMU Democracia, a chart with the applicable
CITES and ILO international conventions.
Present annually the situation of the present and future
administrative, fiscal and legal pending issues.
Concerning land tenure:
• Create a policy for land acquisition in the region, including the
possibilities to be given to the people that already live in the
area and would like to stay there.
• Identify all the areas where there is potential for land tenure
conflict, especially in the Urucuri river region, and the specific
procedures that are being used to solve the issues.
• Define a policy and procedures to deal with situations in which
potential conflicts may exist.
Standardize in writing monitoring and control procedures for the
forest areas, including control posts, frequency of mobile
monitoring, equipment and human resources to be used (1 year).
Present the results of the detailed survey of the families that live
inside the company’s and surrounding areas and a schedule of
actions to formalize the use and tenure rights of these families.
Review the Forest Management Plan on the actual cut volume,
species, hauling systems currently used by the company and the
reduction of commercial areas by their incorporation into
conservation areas and other factors.
Consolidate the following planning documents into a single one,
eliminating overlaps and inconsistencies: i) Management Plan; ii)
forest qualification plan; and, iii) multi-annual supply plan. Define a
timeframe and methodology for the periodic review of the forest
management plan.
Update and detail the monitoring system for impacts caused on
regeneration by the different types of interventions, including
considerations about seed dispersal agents for the main species
explored.
Analyze the present and future situation for each commercial
species harvested, indicating their growth projections for lower
diameter classes in the next cycle, based on the most relevant data
available, including growth and mortality.
Identify specific strategies for the management of species that have
fewer individuals in the lower diameter classes (less than 45 cm
DBH) than in the upper classes – frequency distribution by diameter
classes different from Inverted J.
Develop a list of the most common wildlife species in the areas of
influence of the project and its situation regarding the threat of
6 months
1.1
1 year
1.4
Annually
1.8
6 months
2.1, 2.3
1 year
2.4, 2.5, 3.2
6 months
2.6, 6.0
3 months
3.1
3 months
3.1, 3.11
6 months
3.2
1 year
3.2
1 year
3.2
1 year
3.2, 3.4
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
extinction.
Using monitoring data (permanent plots and post harvest impact
evaluation), develop specific silvicultural prescriptions for the area,
that include, but are not limited to: i) favoring commercial species
seed dispersal and regeneration; ii) silvicultural treatments for
commercial species growth and/or regeneration; and, iii) definition
of seed trees.
Concerning non timber forest products (NTFPs):
• Identify the main non-timber forest products used by
neighboring
populations
(riverside
and
indigenous
communities) and incorporate them in the forest inventory
system.
• Develop an agreement with the representative bodies of
farmers/gatherers (e.g.: o Conselho de Associações
Agroextrativistas de Manicoré – CAAM/CNS), that regulates the
access to brazil nut trees in the logging areas
• Conduct a quantitative/qualitative survey of the main non-timber
forest products with the objective of monitoring the most
important species for commercialization and subsistence by the
community.
• Revise and publish the company’s policy in relation to the
access to non-timber forest products, guaranteeing that the
traditional mechanisms of workers’ exploitation are not
perpetuated.
Implement a GIS system and create complete and geo-referenced
logging maps.
Implement a consultation system for the documentation on
implementation procedures for forest management activities, so
that these are accessible to the company’s employees, especially
at the camps.
Implement a training update program for field teams.
Improve the production monitoring system, defining aggregate data
to be used as planning tools and a system to make them available
with the periodicity needed for their use.
Annually present the evolution and adaptation of the production
plan and its compatibility with the strategy for the increase in forest
base to sustain such an increase in production.
As part of the post-harvesting evaluation, analyze the seed trees by
species and quality and present specific recommendations to
update the management system.
Review the methodology for data survey and analysis and make it
compatible with long term needs, including:
i)
Homogenizing survey criteria for regeneration, remaining
trees and post harvesting damage;
ii)
compare traditional plot analysis with square plots and
numerically establish which method is best; and,
iii)
based on existing experiences, develop a field manual for
the location, shape and position of inventory sub-plots.
Concerning the road system:
i)
implement the construction and maintenance plan for roads
and bridges;
ii)
recuperate the roads and logging yards damaged during
the 1999 and beginning of the 2000 harvesting activities;
and,
iii)
locate gravel areas on the maps and include in the
management plan procedures for their removal from the
area.
As part of the pre-harvesting plan mark the seed trees and
2 years
3.3, 3.2, 3.3,
4.2
1 year
3.5, 3.6, 5.1,
6.0
1 year
3.6, 3.7
1 year
3.8
6 months
6 months
3.9
3.10
Annually
4.1
1 year
4.2
9 months
4.3
6 months
4.5, 4.7, 4.8,
4.12
1 year
4.11
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
commercial or potentially commercial species of lower diameter
classes that are located close to roads and logging yards to
increase their visibility so that they can be better protected during
hauling operations.
Implement a monitoring system for wildlife and/or impact indicator
species, especially those endangered.
Present a system for the identification of species with low
demographic density by the forest inventory and specific actions to
guarantee the conservation of these species.
Field demarcation of absolute conservation areas.
Incorporate permanent and temporary watercourses and respective
permanent preservation areas on harvesting maps.
Develop standards for the storage and handling of chemical
products and fuel, and define a place for washing machinery and a
system to collect used lubricating oil. In the camps, establish an
exclusive site for the operation of energy generators.
Conduct a survey of the populations living in the surrounding areas
and in areas under direct and indirect influence of the project,
highlighting, among others, aspects of social-economic, cultural and
politic organization of the communities and/or family groups, also
trying to identify the areas that they occupy and the type and period
of harvesting of non timber forest products.
Implement a proposal for regular communication with the
surrounding community. Clearly inform stakeholders who are the
persons in charge of external contacts in the company.
Present a diagnostic that includes an analysis of the perception
about the company’s activities by the communities in the influence
area. Present a preliminary evaluation of the company’s impact
upon Vila Democracia.
Present a prospective study about the social impacts on the local
population caused by the cyclic periods of decrease in the
company’s activities.
Present an alternative solution to the transit of the people who live
in the houses by the shipping harbor in the Democracia module.
Carry out a survey of the impacts of forestry activities on the local
community, with special emphasis on the potential direct damages
and, if necessary, indicating a compensation plan.
Finish the improvements in the camps, including bathrooms,
showers and the cleaning of the surrounding area of the Mataurá
camp.
Implement a Worker Health Program and First Aid Program, with
training for all workers and a monitoring system for hearing and
visual capabilities.
Develop, standardize and systematize a Training Program for forest
workers, especially those involved in harvesting activities.
Intensify and systematize employee’s training, establishing
responsibilities, requiring the use of PPE and developing
awareness and education programs.
Implement the Occupational Health Medical Control Program
(PCMSO) and Environmental Risk Prevention Program (PPRA) and
the SESMET.
Study alternative transportation options to the pickup truck that
takes workers from the camp to harvesting areas and back, in the
project areas.
GMO RR and Gethal cannot make any statement that SmartWood
certification contributes or guarantees that investors will obtain the
financial returns expected.
Revise the plant’s CoC system to guarantee the origin of the wood
6 months
5.1, 5.4
6 months
5.4
1 year
6 months
5.2, 5.5, 5.6
5.7
6 months
5.24
1 year
6.0
6 months
6.2
6 months
6.2, 6.9
2 years
6.2
3 months
6.7
2 years
6.8
6 months
6.10
6 months
6.10
1 year
6.10
6 months
6.11
6 months
6.11
6 months
6.13
Immediate
7.1
1 month
8.1
43.
44.
that is stored under water.
Concerning the chain of custody:
• Include the registered code established by SmartWood and
approved by FSC in shipping or any relevant documentation
related to the selling of certified materials (contract for buying
logs, invoices, etc.).
• Require properly authorized legal permits for all logs bought in
the market. Any complaints of purchase of illegal wood that are
confirmed as true may cause the suspension of the certification.
• Mark all the logs from certified areas, so that they are visually
distinguished from the non certified logs (through paint, labels,
etc.).
Concerning High Conservation Value Areas:
• Present a study establishing the attributes that may
characterize a project or part of it as a high conservation value
area in the company’s case. Consider in this study the
existence of Pau Rosa trees (Aniba roseodora, Ducke).
• Present a map (1:20.000 scale) of the areas in the 100%
inventory for the year 2000, identifying the areas considered as
high conservation value areas.
• Define a chapter in the Forest Management Plan dedicated to
the issue of high conservation value areas and the specific
management strategies for them.
• Incorporate in the post harvesting monitoring system the
specific evaluation of the efficiency of the measures applied to
maintain or increase the conservation attributes identified in the
high conservation value areas.
Immediate
8.2, 8.3
1 year
9.1, 9.2, 9.3,
9.4
4. TABLE OF RESULTS
Principle
Criterion
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1
3,0
2,5
3,5
3,5
3,0
4,0
3,0
4,0
3,0
2
4,0
5,0
3,0
3,0
3,0
3,0
3,5
3,5
N/A
3
2,5
3,5
3,0
3,0
4,0
2,5
4,0
3,0
3,0
4
3,0
3,0
3,0
3,0
3,0
2,5
4,0
4,0
N/A
5
5,0
3,0
3,5
2,5
3,0
n.a.
4,0
6
3,0
3,0
3,5
n.a.
3,5
n.a.
7
3,0
3,0
3,0
3,5
3,5
8
3,0
4,0
3,0
5,0
3,0
9
3,5
5,0
n.a.
3,0
10
3,5
5,0
4,0
3,5
11
3,0
3,0
n.a.
3,5
12
3,0
3,5
n.a.
4,0
13
n.a.
n.a.
3,0
14
4,0
n.a.
n.a.
15
n.a.
n.a.
3,5
16
3,0
n.a.
4,0
17
n.a.
n.a.
18
n.a.
19
n.a.
20
n.a.
21
n.a.
22
4,0
23
n.a.
24
3,0
25
n.a.
26
n.a.
27
Average
3,3
3,3
3,3
3,4
„ Criteria with scores lower than three
„ Criteria with scores higher than the principle’s average
3,5
3,4
3,9
3,9
3,0
5. APPENDIXES
nd
1. Adapted standards for Gethal’s assessment – 2 Assessment 2000
2. Table of Results – 1st Assessment
3. Pre-conditions for Certification – 1st Assessment Oct 1999
4. Conditions for Certification – 1st Assessment Oct 1999
Appendix 2. Table of Results – 1st Assessment
Principle
Criterion
1
2
3
4
5
1
3,0
2,5
3,0
2,5
3,0
2
3,5
4,0
2,5
3,0
3,0
3
2,5
3,5
2,5
3,0
3,0
4
3,0
3,0
3,0
3,0
2,0
5
5,0
3,0
3,5
2,5
2,0
6
3,0
n.a.
3,0
7
3,0
2,5
3,0
8
3,5
2,0
5,0
9
2,5
4,0
n.a.
10
3,5
4,0
5,0
11
2,5
3,0
n.a.
12
2,5
n.a.
13
n.a.
n.a.
14
4,0
n.a.
15
n.a.
n.a.
16
2,5
n.a.
17
n.a.
18
n.a.
19
n.a.
20
n.a.
21
n.a.
22
4,0
23
n.a.
24
3,0
25
n.a.
26
n.a.
27
Average
3,40
3,20
2,95
2,96
3,14
„ Criteria with scores lower than three
„ Criteria with scores higher than the principle’s average
6
4,0
2,5
2,5
2,5
n.a.
3,0
3,5
3,0
n.a.
3,5
3,5
4,0
3,20
7
2,5
3,5
3,0
4,0
4,0
3,40
8
4,0
3,5
3,0
4,0
3,63
Appendix 3. Pre-conditions for Certification – 1st Assessment Feb. 1998
Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Pre-conditions
ƒ
Present all the certificates that prove the due payment of federal and state taxes,
valid for 6 months.
ƒ
Present the history of the situation related to fines received from the federal
environmental agency (IBAMA) since 1990.
ƒ
Conduct a topographic survey of the perimeter areas of the Democracia project. List
the neighboring areas and reinforce and consolidate border lines with third parties.
Develop a written record for the areas that are registered in the public’s notary.
ƒ
Identify on the maps and develop a clear policy for the situation of the areas that are
subject to indigenous land claims, including commitments of not carrying out forestry
activities in these areas until the situation is completely resolved.
ƒ
Analyze the present and future situation of the commercial species (the ones
harvested in 1999) indicating: (i) growth projections until the next cycle for the
species in the lower diameter classes, based on the most relevant data available,
including growth and mortality; (ii) compare the situation of the commercial species in
the higher diameter classes and in natural regeneration, based on forest inventory
data.
ƒ
Present – with an adequate scale and detailed captions – maps of the forestry
regions with the definition of stands that shows the long term planning of the
Management Unit, including: existent structures; family groupings, dwellers and
neighbors; conservation areas.
ƒ
Develop an operation manual and train field team in its use.
ƒ
Clearly demonstrate, through field operations, the capacity of harvesting 1,800 m3
per month (1/12 of the 2000 production goal), respecting the required technical,
environmental and social criteria.
ƒ
Present a detailed operational plan, including a time/financial schedule of the phases
necessary to carry out, with the company’s own personnel and resources, the wood
production plan that prescribes the harvest of 8,200 m3 in 1999 and of 105,800 m3 in
2001.
ƒ
Detail in an internal document, the executive plan for hiring and training personnel,
the detailed mapping of at least 8,000 ha in 2000, the planning, opening and
construction of roads and trails in 6000 ha in the year of 2000 and the acquisition of
equipment and the setup of the maintenance system for supporting the growth from
8,200 m3 to 105,800 m3 in about 15 months, as from October 1999.
ƒ
Plan and implement with 9 months of precedence, the road system for the compartment
being harvested in the second semester of 2000. Construct the system according to the
guidelines in chapter 2 of the management plan (page 125), which contains the correct
practices for the construction and maintenance of roads, bridges, drainage systems and
yards.
ƒ
Remove the residues of the construction and/or maintenance of bridges and roads
and plan the construction of the next roads or other structures according to the
guidelines in the management plan, at least one year before the beginning of the
harvesting in the area.
ƒ
Establish a protection program for water courses and for the recuperation of the
damages caused by past activities, where applicable.
ƒ
Plan the road system on maps that have all the terrain elements (see item 4.1 and
introduction). When opening roads and trails, control the movement and deposition of
residues and prevent the accumulation of soil in water courses.
ƒ
Develop a field manual with figures and explanation texts for the employees.
Establish regular recycling training programs for chainsaw operators.
ƒ
Make a written commitment of not cutting trees in the permanent preservation areas.
This procedure must be followed rigorously by Gethal’s employees and/or the
companies contracted for the activities.
ƒ
Map correctly the permanent preservation areas and mark them in the field, for the
years of 1999 and 2000.
ƒ
Present a list of the main species used by the local population and, for those that are
already included in the 100% forest inventory, establish a specific management
strategy.
ƒ
Conduct an initial characterization, following the precaution principle, of the different
ecosystems existent at the landscape level and identify them on the maps.
ƒ
Define specific proposals for minimizing the impact at landscape level.
Criterion
1.3
1.3
2.1
2.1
3.2
3.2
3.9
4.1
4.1
4.1
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.7
4.9
4.12
4.12
5.1
5.2
5.2
21
ƒ
22
ƒ
23
ƒ
24
ƒ
25
ƒ
26
ƒ
27
ƒ
28
ƒ
Demarcate on the maps the absolute conservation areas, representing the
ecosystems identified in the company’s area.
Establish a procedure for the selection and field demarcation of the permanent
preservation areas in the places with higher impact risks.
GETHAL must define a strategy for social action with the surrounding communities
and in the project’s influence area, clearly establishing who will be the person in
charge of the company’s activities and how this process will be conducted.
Identify on the maps all the families and/or communities that live in the company’s or
neighboring areas.
Present a proposal on how to improve the communication with the local population, in
order to present the company’s objectives and goals, clearly stating the activities to
be done, their timeframe and the perspectives of the enterprise, besides of an
explanation about certification.
Define and publicize the company’s policy in relation to the access to non timber
forest products, guaranteeing that the traditional mechanisms for workers exploitation
are not perpetuated.
Prepare a financial report approved by GMO RR and by Gethal that clearly states the
following:
- Volumes available of the desired species with consideration to forestry
production areas, diameter limits, protected areas, harvesting cycle and trees
planted in the company’s area with a clear conjecture regarding the areas to be
acquired and the volumes to be bought from third parties;
- Harvesting costs (see precondition for 7.2);
- Expected returns.
5.5
Prepare an operational plan and budget for the years of 2000 and 2001 in order to
demonstrate how the management activities will be implemented to supply the
growing demand of the plant. This budget must be approved by GMO RR and Gethal
and must include all the human resources, equipment and costs related to the items
of all management activities, including, but not limited to:
- pre-harvest inventory and planning;
- felling;
- hauling trails and clearings layout;
- road construction and maintenance;
- hauling;
- transportation to the plant;
- monitoring;
- silviculture;
- experiments or research.
7.2
5.7
6.0
6.0
6.2
6.4
7.1
Appendix 4. Conditions for Certification – 1st Assessment Feb/1998
Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
Criterion
Conditions
1.1
•
Create and initiate the implementation of a training program on the
company’s certification process, including communities, for the diffusion of
FSC’s Principles and Criteria on the long term.
1.2
•
Demarcate on the compartment maps the permanent preservation areas and
the absolute conservation areas.
1.4
•
Develop company guidelines to comply with applicable ILO Conventions and
CITES.
1.4
•
Develop and promote to employees, contractors and the population in the
areas of influence of the FMU Democracia, a chart with the issues that are
covered by international conventions (wildlife, flora, labor relations and others).
2.3
•
Present a document with all the areas with potential land tenure conflicts,
identifying all the specific actions that are being taken to solve the issue.
2.3
•
Define a policy and procedures to deal with situations in which potential
conflicts may exist.
2.4
•
Standardize in writing the procedures related to the monitoring and security
of the forest areas, including fire prevention and fighting.
3.1
•
Review the Forest Management Plan on the actual cut volume, species,
extraction systems currently used by the company and the reduction of
commercial areas by their incorporation into conservation areas and other
factors.
3.2
•
Present prevention and combat plans for forest fires in the FMU.
3.2
•
Define with greater detail how monitoring will be done throughout time to
assess the impact on regeneration by the different types of interventions.
3.2
•
Develop a list of the most common wildlife in the project’s influence areas
and its situation regarding threat of extinction.
3.3
•
Start a research plan to develop specific silvicultural prescriptions. The
research can be conducted to include regeneration requirements and/or seed
dispersal mechanisms for commercial species and silvicultural treatments that
enhance growth and/or regeneration of commercial species.
3.3
•
Present the preliminary results on the regeneration requirements for
commercial species (e.g.: light, seed dispersal mechanisms, etc.) and
silvicultural treatments.
3.5
•
Identify the main non timber forest products used by neighboring populations
(riverside and indigenous communities) and incorporate them in the forest
inventory system.
3.5
•
Discuss with local communities and/or their representatives possible
economic uses for non timber forest products.
3.6
•
Implement a Geographic Information System according to the present plans
and elaborate complete and georeferenced logging maps.
3.8
•
Implement a consultation system for the documentation about
implementation procedures for forest management activities, so that these are
accessible to the company’s employees, especially at the camps.
3.9
•
Implement a training recycling program for field teams.
3.10
•
Improve the production monitoring system, defining aggregate data to be
used as planning tools and a system to make them available with the
periodicity needed for their use.
3.11
•
Define periodicity and methods for the review of the forest management plan.
4.1
•
Every six months, present the evolution and adaptation of the production plan
and its compatibility with the strategy for the increase in forest base, which
sustains such an increase in production.
4.2
•
As part of the post-harvesting evaluation, analyze seed trees by species and
quality and present specific recommendations for the management system.
4.2
•
Develop and implement a monitoring system for the response of commercial
species to the openings created by harvesting.
4.2
•
Establish goals for the number of seed trees by species.
4.2
•
Document the response of commercial species to disturbances (e.g.: canopy
openings during commercial operations) to facilitate the definition of silvicultural
prescriptions.
4.3
•
Revise data survey and analysis methodology and make it compatible with
long term needs, homogenizing survey criteria for regeneration, remaining
Timeframe
6 months
6 months
6 months
1 year
1 year
1 year
1 year
6 months
6 months
9 months
9 months
1 year
3 years
1 year
2 years
6 months
1 year
6 months
6 months
6 months
Every
months
1 year
2 years
3 years
3 years
9 months
6
28
•
29
•
30
•
31
•
32
33
•
•
34
•
35
•
36
•
37
•
38
39
•
•
40
•
41
•
42
•
43
•
44
•
45
•
46
•
47
•
49
•
50
•
51
•
52
•
trees and post harvesting damage.
Develop field manual for the localization, shape and position of inventory subplots based on existing experiences.
Implement a plan for the construction and maintenance of roads and bridges
inside the areas of the company.
As part of the pre-harvesting plan mark the seed trees and commercial or
potentially commercial species of lower diameter classes that are located close
to roads and yards to increase their visibility so that they can be better
protected during hauling operations.
Conduct a quantitative/qualitative survey of the main non timber forest
products with the objective of monitoring the most important species for
commercialization and subsistence by the community.
Implement a monitoring system for wildlife and/or impact indicator species.
Define a proposal and/or options for the monitoring of wildlife and/or impact
indicator species.
Present a plan with specific actions to monitor the occurrence of endangered
wildlife species in the area.
Present a system for the identification of low demographic density species by
the forest inventory and specific actions to guarantee the conservation of these
species.
Reassess with inventory, trail demarcation and felling teams the selection of
trails and trees to be felled, respecting the minimum distance required by law,
especially in regard to steep areas.
Conduct a forest zoning assessment to have a clearer distinction of the
division between the production and conservation areas.
Demarcate in the field the absolute conservation areas.
Incorporate permanent and temporary watercourses and respective
permanent preservation areas on harvesting maps.
In the camps, establish an exclusive site for the operation of energy
generators.
Develop standards for the storage and handling of chemical products and
fuel and define a place for washing machinery and a system to collect used
lubricating oil.
The company must conduct a survey of the populations living in the
surrounding areas and in areas under direct and indirect influence of the
project, highlighting, among others, aspects of social-economic, cultural and
politic organization of the communities and/or family groups, also trying to
identify the areas that they occupy and the type and period of harvesting of non
timber forest products.
Implement a proposal for regular communication with the surrounding
community. Clearly inform stakeholders who are the persons in charge of
external contacts in the company.
Develop an agreement with the representative bodies of farmers/gatherers
(e.g.: o Conselho de Associações Agroextrativistas de Manicoré –
CAAM/CNS), that regulates the access to Brazil nut trees in the logging areas.
Carry out a survey of the impact of forestry activities upon the local
community, with special emphasis on the potential direct damages and, if
necessary, indicating a compensation plan.
Finish improvements in the camps, including: (i) guarantee the adequate
supply of drinkable fresh water in the camp; (ii) improvements in the food
storage conditions at the Mataurá camp; (iii) Cleaning of the surrounding areas
of the Mataurá camp.
Implement a Worker Health Program and First Aid Program, with training for
all workers and a monitoring system for hearing and visual capabilities.
Establishment of the Internal Commission for the Prevention of Accidents
(CIPA), according to legislation 3,214 (Portaria), NR 5, item 5.1, that defines
the CIPA requirement and item 5.3 that defines its composition.
Present a plan for the establishment of the SESMET according to legislation
3,214 (Portaria), NR 4, item 4.2, that defines the dimensioning of the SESMET.
Intensify and systematize employee’s training, establishing responsibilities,
requiring the use of PPE and developing awareness and education programs.
Establish a safety, medicine and hygiene program with the implementation of
the Occupational Health Medical Control Program (PCMSO) and
4.3
9 months
4.5
6 months
4.11
1 year
5.1
1 year
5.1
5.1
1 year
1 year
5.3
1 year
5.4
6 months
5.4
6 months
5.5
6 months
5.5
5.7
1 year
6 months
5.24
6 months
5.24
6 months
6.0
1 year
6.2
6.4
1 year
6.8
2 years
6.10
3 months
6.10
6 months
6.11
3 months
6.11
3 months
6.11
6 months
6.11
6 months
53
•
54
•
55
•
56
•
57
•
58
•
Environmental Risk Prevention Program (PPRA), both required by NR-7 of the
legislation (Portaria) 3.214.
Employee transportation from the Democracia harbor to the logging are must
be done in an appropriate vehicle.
GMO RR and Gethal cannot make any statement that SmartWood
certification contributes or guarantees that investors will obtain the financial
returns expected.
Revise the plant’s CoC system to guarantee the origin of the wood that is
stored under water.
The registered code established by SmartWood and approved by FSC must
be included in shipping or any relevant documentation related to the selling of
certified materials (contract for buying and selling logs, invoices, etc.).
Require properly authorized legal permits for all logs bought from third parties
and be able to document that all the logs used in the plant are coming from
legal sources. Any proved complaints of illegal wood purchase may cause the
suspension of the certification.
Mark all the logs from certified areas, so that they are visually distinguished
from the non certified logs (through paint, labels, etc.)
6.11
7.1
Immediate
8.1
1 month
8.2
Immediate
8.3
Immediate
8.3
Immediate
Monitoramento Annual de Gethal Amazonas S.A. 2002
SW-FM/COC-119
Processo de Monitoramento
A.
B.
Ano de Monitoramento: 2002
Datas do Monitoramento: 08-10 de Outubro de 2002
C.
Equipe de Monitoramento:
• Tasso Resende Azevedo - Eng. Florestal, coordenador do Núcleo Amazônico do Imaflora;
• Paulo de Oliveira - Eng. agrícola com especialização em ciências sociais, trabalha atualmente na
FASE2;
• Mauricio de Almeida Voivodic - Eng. Florestal, técnico do Programa de Certificação Florestal do
Imaflora.
D.
Visão Geral do Monitoramento:
Na manhã do dia 08 de novembro, a equipe de auditoria reuniu-se com os Srs Carlos Alberto
Guerreiro, Joel Alipio dos Santos e Marcos Oliveira (engenheiros responsáveis pelas atividades
florestais da empresa) no aeroporto de Manaus, onde foi tomado um avião para Manicoré,
município onde se localiza o escritório da Gethal Amazonas.
Ao chegar no escritório, ainda pela manhã, foi feita uma reunião a qual participaram a equipe de
auditoria, os engenheiros da empresa e o Sr. Cardoso, responsável pelas atividades de recursos
humanos da empresa. Nesta reunião foram apresentadas as dificuldades e avanços da Gethal em
relação ao ano anterior, e começou-se a discutir as ações corretivas. Durante a tarde, Tasso e
Mauricio se deslocaram até a área florestal da empresa, onde pode-se acompanhar algumas
atividades de exploração, as condições de trabalho e de moradia dos funcionários. Paulo ficou em
Manicoré, onde pode realizar entrevistas com diferentes grupos da sociedade, envolvidos e/ou
afetados pelas operações da empresa. Durante a noite, Tasso retornou a Manicoré com a equipe da
Gethal, e Mauricio ficou no acampamento florestal para realizar entrevistas diretas e em grupo com
os funcionários das atividades florestais.
No dia 09 de novembro, Tasso e Paulo retornaram à área florestal da empresa e Paulo foi à
Comunidade Democracia onde pode conversar com diversos moradores e líderes locais a respeito
das atividades da empresa e seus impactos à comunidade adjacente. Tasso e Mauricio voltaram a
acompanhar as atividades florestais, conduzindo entrevistas com os funcionários e checando as
condições de trabalho e as técnicas de manejo empregadas. No final da tarde, a equipe de
monitoramento retornou à Manicoré.
No dia seguinte foi realizada uma reunião de fechamento com a equipe da empresa, onde foi
apresentada a situação das ações corretivas, e os pontos que a empresa deveria melhorar o
desempenho. Com isso a atividade de monitoramento foi finalizada, e a equipe retornou à Manaus.
E.
Locais Visitados:
(a) Campo: atividades de exploração florestal nos Sub-bloco 50A, 50B e 49A do talhão 7.
Passagens de nível e estradas nos Talhões 3 e 4. Comunidade Democracia, acampamento da equipe
florestal e pátio de toras às margens do Rio Madeira.
2
O nome da instituição é apenas uma referência. O técnico participou da avaliação na condição profissional autônomo.
(b) Sede do Município em Manicoré – Escritório da Gethal, CAAM (Conselho das Associações
Agroextratitivistas de Manicoré ) e CNS – (Conselho Nacional de Seringueiros)
F.
Pessoal Entrevistado:
Pessoa
Posição/Organização
Carlos Alberto Guerreiro
Eng. Ftal., Membro do Conselho Diretor
Cardoso
Responsável pelas relações da empresa com as
comunidades.
Joel Alipío dos Santos
Eng. Fltal – Responsável técnico pelo projeto
Marcos Oliveira
Eng. Ftal - Coordenador de Planejamento
Rosinei Soares Silva
Coordenador Operacional
Equipes de Campo
Técnicos Florestais da Exploração
Equipes de corte e arraste
Comunitários
G.
Moradores da Comunidade Democracia
Documentos Revisados:
Documento
Autor
Local
Plano de Manejo
Gethal
Escritório em Manicoré
Relatório de monitoramento anual 2001
Imaflora
Proposta de trabalho para levantamento de fauna
Prof. UFAM
Escritório
acampamento
do
Mapas das áreas da empresa
Gethal
Escritório
acampamento
do
Fichas de campo de avaliações de impactos pós Gethal
colheita
Escritório
acampamento
do
Relatório do
Certificação.
Acampamento
Escritório Imaflora
Andamento
das
Condições
de Gethal
Estudo “Relação das comunidades de Manicoré
IBENS
com a empresa Gethal Amazonas”
Termo de compromisso para coleta de frutos de Gethal
castanha do Brasil do Projeto Democracia
CAAM
Escritório Imaflora
e Escritório Imaflora
e
Plano de trabalho do estudo: “Análise dos Prof. UFAM
indicadores sócio-econômicos em área de influencia
do projeto Democracia: um estudo de caso”
Escritório Imaflora
1.2 Observações e Conclusões Gerais
A empresa demonstrou um avanço considerável em seu relacionamento com a comunidade local no que se
refere a questão da coleta de castanha nas áreas florestais de exploração. Foi firmado um contrato entre a
comunidade e a CAAM (Conselho das Associações Agroextratitivistas de Manicoré) onde ficou
estabelecido formalmente o interesse da empresa em permitir o acesso dos comunitários aos recursos
florestais já utilizados de forma tradicional anterior à chegada da empresa na região. A coleta é realizada
nos meses de maior frutificação da castanha, que vai de novembro a abril, sendo justamente o período de
pausa das atividades de exploração madeireira. Além disso, segundo o termo de compromisso firmado, os
comunitários serão capacitados para fazerem leitura de mapas de inventário, onde poderão localizar com
maio facilidade as árvores castanheiras e as estradas de acesso.
Diversos trabalhos com a comunidade estão propostos, entre eles alguns estudos que estão sendo
coordenados pelo IBENS – Instituto Brasileiro de Educação e Negócios Sustentáveis. Foi realizado um
estudo sobre a relação das comunidades de Manicoré com a empresa, onde constatou-se que uma boa
parte dos entrevistados possuem uma opinião positiva quanto à Gethal, embora a grande maioria tenha
ressaltado que este relacionamento pode ser melhorado, principalmente nos aspectos de transporte, saúde,
e interlocução com a comunidade. Outros estudos estão planejados para este ano, entre eles um que
aparenta ser bastante interessante de análise de indicadores sócio-econômicos na área de influência das
atividades florestais da empresa.
Outro ponto que merece destaque, é a previsão de saída das áreas florestais próximas à Vila Democracia a
partir de 2005, que poderá causar impactos à comunidade do entorno. A empresa deverá realizar trabalhos
para que tais impactos sejam minimizados a partir de novas oportunidades de geração de renda, já que boa
parte dos moradores trabalham nas atividades da empresa. Ë bastante importante que os moradores das
comunidades locais estejam avisados de tal mudança e participem das discussões sobre as alternativas que
serão propostas.
Em relação às atividades de monitoramento, no que se refere a parcelas permanentes e pós-exploratório, a
empresa vem realizando os levantamento mas ainda não buscou sistematizar os dados de forma a reverter
em prescrições específicas para o manejo realizado. O levantamento que vem sendo realizado pela
empresa ainda necessita de um melhor refinamento pois são levantadas diversas informações que não
terão muita aplicação e consomem um bom tempo de trabalho para serem coletadas. Entretanto a empresa
vem buscando parceria com universidades e instituições de pesquisa para uma análise aprofundada dos
dados levantados, o que vem a ser positivo dada uma natural dificuldade que as empresas possuem em
realizar tais análises.
Quanto ao monitoramento de fauna, ainda não foi realizada nenhuma atividade concreta neste sentido. A
empresa traçou uma parceria com a UFAM, onde dentre outros trabalhos de pesquisa, está planejado um
levantamento de fauna bastante abrangente que visa identificar as populações existentes nas áreas de
manejo. A partir de uma leitura do projeto proposto, pôde-se notar que este trabalho, apesar de fornecer
informações preciosas para a empresa, não representará um real monitoramento do impacto das atividades
de exploração às populações de fauna. Para que isso seja efetivado é necessário que se utilize
metodologias que possibilitem a incorporação da coleta de dados às atividades operacionais da empresa.
Para isso, um grupo de pesquisadores especialistas em diferentes grupos de fauna está desenvolvendo uma
metodologia de monitoramento aplicada às atividade de exploração florestal. Após a publicação deste
trabalho, espera-se que as empresas certificadas possam definitivamente incorporar este tema ao manejo
florestal realizado.
1.3 Status das Condições e Ações Corretivas (CARs)
A. Quadro Resumo do Status das Condições de Certificação
Obs.: As condições apresentadas abaixo são provenientes do Relatório de Avaliação Final de Certificação,
apresentado em 2000, cujo prazo estabelecido era de 2 anos. As CARs 1 a 28/2001, que tiveram origem no
monitoramento de 6 meses (julho de 2001), foram checadas e encerradas no monitoramento anual de
dezembro de 2001. As CARs listadas abaixo (CARs 29 a 40/2001) possuíam prazo para cumprimento em
2002, ou foram criadas em função do adiamento de CARs que venciam em 2001.
Cód.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Condição
Cond. 13 - A partir dos dados de monitoramento (parcelas
permanentes e avaliação de impactos pós exploratórios),
desenvolver prescrições silviculturais específicas para a área
que incluam, porém não se limitem à: (i) favorecimento da
dispersão e regeneração de sementes de espécies
comerciais; (ii) tratamentos silviculturais para crescimento
e/ou regeneração das espécies comerciais e(iv) definição de
porta semente.
Cond. 19 - Apresentar anualmente a evolução e adaptação
do plano de produção e sua compatibilidade com a
estratégia de aumento da base florestal que sustente tal
acréscimo de produção.
Cond.32 - Apresentar um estudo prospectivo de impacto
social sobre a população local, por ocasião dos períodos
cíclicos de diminuição das atividades da empresa.
Prazo
Status
Não
cumprida
01/10/200
2
Cumprida
CAR
02/2002
01/10/200
2
Cumprida
CAR
03/2002
CAR
04/2002
01/10/200
2
Cumprida
CAR29/2001 - Estabelecer de maneira clara e formalizada o
acesso a coleta da castanha, organizando, em parceria com
as comunidades do entorno da UMF e o CAAM a coleta da
safra 2001/2002.
30/01/200
2
Cumprida
30/03/200
2
Cumprida
CAR31/2001 - Apresentar os documentos finais de
reconhecimento de posse a ser concedido aos Srs. Mair
Rocha de Chagas e Lucilo do lote Chagas. (origem:CAR
7/2001).
CAR
01/2002
01/10/200
2
Cond. 34 - Realizar um levantamento dos impactos das
atividades florestais na comunidade local, com enfoque
especial nos potenciais danos diretos, indicando um plano
de compensações caso necessário.
CAR30/2001 - Encaminhar formalmente para as entidades
de representação dos moradores do entorno da UMF
Democracia o chamado “Projeto Castanha”
CAR
30/06/200
2
Não
cumprida
CAR
05/2002
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
CAR32/2001 - Apresentar evidências concretas e formais
da evolução do contato com as associações e ou
cooperativas de castanheiros na região de Manicoré.
(origem: CAR 16/2001)
CAR33/2001 - Confirmar a contratação do Médico com
Especialização em Medicina do Trabalho. (origem: CAR
23/2001)
CAR34/2001- Incluir no Plano de Manejo procedimentos
específicos para lidar com demandas e ou conflitos com
comunidade em especial aquelas referentes a questões de
posse da terra. (origem: CAR 6/2001)
CAR35/2001 - Finalizar a recuperação das estradas e pátios
danificados durante a exploração em 1999 e início de 2000.
(origem: CAR 9/2001)
30/03/200
2
Cumprida
15/03/200
2
Cumprida
15/05/200
2
Cumprida
15/10/200
2
Em
andament
o
CAR36/2001 - Incluir uma sessão sobre monitoramento de
fauna no Plano de Manejo. (origem: CAR 8/2001)
CAR37/2001 - Apresentar autorização do IPAAM para
área de cascalheira já instalada no projeto Democracia e
que se localiza em parte a menos de 30 m do curso de água.
(origem: CAR 10/2001)
CAR38/2001 - Apresentar o sistema de monitoramento de
fauna e/ou espécies indicadoras de impacto, especialmente
aquelas ameaçadas.
01/10/200
2
Não
cumprida
30/07/200
2
Cumprida
30/07/200
2
Checar
em 2003
CAR
06/2002
Não
cumprida
CAR
07/2002
Não
cumprida
CAR
08/2002
(origem: CAR 12/2001)
15.
16.
CAR39/2001 - Apresentar a avaliação preliminar sobre o
impacto da empresa sobre a comunidade Vila Democracia.
(origem: CAR 17/2001)
30/07/200
2
CAR40/2001 - Realizar uma análise das percepções das
comunidades da área de influência, levantadas no DRP
(origem: CAR 18/2001)
30/07/200
2
Cumprida
Monitoramento Annual de Gethal Amazonas S.A. 2002
SW-FM/COC-119
INFORMAÇÕES PARA O RESUMO PÚBLICO
Nota para OMF: A seção 1.0 será anexada ao resumo público da operação certificada na forma
de um adendo e será publicada no website do SmartWood.
Processo de Monitoramento
A. Ano do monitoramento: 2003
B. Data e itinerário do monitoramento: 15 a 17 de dezembro de 2003
A equipe de auditoria se reuniu em Manaus – AM na manhã do dia 15 de dezembro e, junto com
o engenheiro florestal responsável da Gethal, Sr. Marcos Oliveira, se deslocou via avião para o
município de Manicoré, onde se encontra a sede florestal da empresa. Ainda no dia 15 foi
realizada uma reunião com a equipe da Gethal, na qual foi apresentado o andamento das
atividades de manejo florestal, e as respostas às ações corretivas aplicáveis. À tarde, os
auditores seguiram de barco para a área florestal da empresa, na margem esquerda do Rio
Madeira. O auditor Mauricio Voivodic seguiu para à Unidade de Manejo Florestal, onde
acompanhou atividades de arraste e transporte de toras. A auditora Heidi Cristina permaneceu
na comunidade Democracia, vizinha da UMF, onde realizou entrevistas com os moradores.
No dia 16 de dezembro, a equipe se separou, sendo que o auditor Mauricio Voivodic retornou à
UMF, onde acompanhou a finalização das atividades de manejo da empresa de 2003, visitou
áreas manejadas e preparadas para o manejo em 2004, entrevistou os funcionários da equipe
florestal, e observou as condições do acampamento, refeitório e oficina de máquinas e
equipamentos. A auditora Heidi Cristina permaneceu em Manicoré, onde conduziu entrevistas à
funcionários administrativos da empresa, e a grupos de interesse de Manicoré.
No dia 17 de dezembro, foi realizada uma reunião final com a equipe da empresa, onde foram
apresentadas as constatações da auditoria, e os encaminhamentos para o próximo ano. Após a
reunião, a equipe de auditores retornou à Manaus, e posteriormente à São Paulo.
Além disso, foi realizada uma reunião com o Diretor Geral da Gethal em São Paulo, em 29 de
março de 2004, dado que o mesmo não estava presente no momento da auditoria. Nesta
reunião
foram
levantadas
informações
gerais
sobre
a
gestão
da
empresa
e
a
situação/perspectivas de desempenho financeiro das atividades de manejo. Além disso foram
apresentados os principais resultados do monitoramento e os encaminhamentos para o
próximo ano.
C.
•
Equipe de monitoramento:
Mauricio de Almeida Voivodic: Engenheiro Florestal, Coordenador de Florestas Naturais
do Programa de Certificação Florestal do Imaflora. Tem trabalhado nos últimos anos com
processos de certificação florestal FSC na Amazônia, tanto empresarial como
comunitário.
•
Heidi Cristina Buzato: Socióloga, MSc, com ampla experiência em atividades de
certificação florestal;
D.
Aspectos gerais:
Este relatório refere-se ao terceiro monitoramento anual realizado nas áreas de manejo florestal
da Gethal Amazonas Ltda, mencionada neste relatório apenas por Gethal.
A equipe de auditores verificou o cumprimento de nove ações corretivas, estabelecidas em 2002
com vencimento em 2003. Além disso, foi verificada a continuidade no cumprimento geral dos
P&C do FSC. Em 2003 a Gethal manteve adequadamente seu compromisso com a certificação e
a equipe recomenda a manutenção deste certificado.
E. Metodologia aplicada:
o
Avaliação do sistema de manejo
No momento da auditoria, a operação de manejo já se encontrava no final da safra. Já haviam
sido encerradas as atividades de corte e derruba, restando apenas algumas toras para serem
arrastadas, e alguns pátios com toras a ser transportadas até o pátio principal na beira do Rio
Madeira. As atividades de arraste e transporte foram acompanhadas, e os trabalhadores
envolvidos entrevistados. Além disso, foram visitadas áreas manejadas no início do ano, áreas
onde foram oferecidos treinamentos para novos funcionários, e áreas preparadas para a
exploração de 2004.
o
Locais visitados
ƒ
Área florestal: Talhão 6, bloco E10B (arraste de toras) e blocos Z1A e B3C (corte em julho de
2003);
ƒ
Acampamento: Alojamentos, oficina mecânica, refeitório, cozinha, banheiros e lavanderia.
ƒ
Comunidade Democracia;
ƒ
Em Manicoré:
ƒ
Escritório do CNS – Conselho Nacional dos Seringueiros;
ƒ
Igreja Matriz de Manicoré;
ƒ
Escola de Informática;
ƒ
Escola de Marcenaria Comunitária (ligada à Igreja);
ƒ
Escritório da empresa.
F. Mudanças na operação:
O ano de 2003 foi decisivo para a continuidade das atividades florestais da Gethal. Após vários
anos marcados pelo baixo rendimento financeiro e por dificuldades na gestão administrativa
dos recursos investidos, no início de 2003 o grupo norte americano de investimentos GMO-RR
considerou perdido o investimento inicial de USD 20 milhões e cogitou o fechamento da
empresa. Neste momento, a empresa FLOREAM (representante do grupo no Brasil e controladora
das ações da Gethal Amazonas) passou por uma reestruturação da equipe diretora, que passou
a contar com o Eng. Florestal Carlos Alberto Guerreiro e com o Sr. Luis Sonerville.
A equipe operacional e administrativa da Gethal Amazonas também passou por uma
reestruturação, se tornando mais enxuta na busca pelo bom desempenho econômico. Com isso,
e prezando pelo planejamento detalhado de atividades, e pela busca intensiva de mercados
externos para produtos certificados, o ano de 2003 foi bastante positivo para a empresa, que
fechou o ano com bom rendimento econômico, e com aumento significativo das exportações de
produtos certificados (~ 50% do volume total produzido).
Com isso, a empresa conseguiu demonstrar ao grupo financiador a viabilidade econômica da
operação, que decidiu pela manutenção das atividades a partir da busca por novos
financiadores, ou mesmo por novo aporte de recursos. As expectativas da diretoria da empresa
para 2004 são de manter o bom desempenho econômico, e trabalhar para um aumento de cerca
de 30% na escala de produção.
G. Pessoas consultadas:
Pessoas entrevistadas
Organização / função
Marcos de Oliveira
Gethal Amazonas – Engenheiro Florestal, responsável técnico.
Sr. Cardoso
Gethal Amazonas - Relações externas
Rosiney
Gethal Amazonas – Gerente operacional
Cristiano
IBENS - Coordenador do projeto castanha
Sérgio
Restaurante terceirizado do acampamento florestal - Responsável
pela cozinha
Sr. Serafim Silva
Gethal Amazonas - Responsável pelo sistema de controle na
florestal
Franquester
Gethal Amazonas - Técnico florestal, chefe da equipe de corte
Márcia
Gethal Amazonas – Técnica de segurança
Funcionário 1
Operador de motosserra
Funcionário 2
Operador de skidder
Funcionário 3
Operador de pá carregadeira
Outros
Demais funcionários
João dos Santos Ipi
Presidente do CNS
Junko Takei
Coordenadora do Programa de Saúde da Hands
Altino Azevedo
Coordenador da marcenaria
Padre Mário
Pároco local
João Wilson Ferreira da Silva
Presidente da Comunidade Democracia
Braulino Marques da Silva
Castanheiro, morador da Vila Democracia
Alfredo Rodrigues Ferreira
Castanheiro, morador da Vila Democracia
Manoel Marques da Silva
Castanheiro, morador da Vila Democracia
H. Documentação revisada:
Documento
Diagnóstico Sócio-econômico das Comunidades Agroextrativistas de
Autor
Local
IBENS
Manicoré
UFAM/Gethal
Manicoré
Manicoré-AM
Treinamento com comunidades – Apostila básica
Manejo da Castanha-do-Brasil para reduzir a contaminação por
fungos produtores da aflatoxina
IBENS/CNS/
Manicoré
Gethal
Curso prático de Coleta de Sementes Florestais na Amazônia
UFAM/Gethal
Manicoré
Safra 2003 – Planejamento de atividades
UFAM/Gethal
Manicoré
Documento de Direito de posse do Sr. Mair Rocha das Chagas no
Gethal
Manicoré
Gethal
Manicoré
Gethal
Manicoré
Gethal
Manicoré
Biribá
Recibo de pagamento de indenização do espólio do Sr. Manoel
Raimundo dos Santos na propriedade Chagas, rio Atininga
Termo de acordo de indenização pelo espólio do Sr. Manoel
Raimundo dos Santos.
Termo de pagamento, feito em juízo, pelo espólio do Sr. Manoel
Raimundo dos Santos.
1.4
Evidências Gerais e Conclusões do Monitoramento
As atividades de manejo florestal da Gethal continuam sendo realizadas no Módulo Democracia,
à beira do Rio Madeira, próximo à comunidade também chamada Democracia. Em 2004 a
empresa espera esgotar as Unidades de Trabalho neste módulo, e transferirá suas operações
para outros dois módulos, localizados mais também no Rio Madeira, rio abaixo a partir de
Manicoré. Em 2003 essas áreas já estavam sendo inventariadas e preparadas para o manejo.
Para 2004 a empresa espera aumentar a escala de produção para 85.000 m³/ano em 3.200 ha
(a safra de 2003 foi de 50.000 m³). Assumindo este volume, a empresa ainda possui área
florestal suficiente para mais 3,5 anos de exploração, e já está planejando a compra de novas
áreas.
A mudança da área de manejo para o Mataurá terá alguns efeitos significativos para a empresa,
principalmente no que se refere à relação que a empresa vem conduzindo com a comunidade
Democracia. Em função da proximidade com suas atividades, a empresa iniciou atividades junto
aos moradores dessa comunidade, dentre as quais se destaca o Projeto Castanha, elaborado e
conduzido em parceria com o IBENS – Instituto Brasileiro de Educação e Negócios Sustentáveis, e
com o CNS – Conselho Nacional dos Seringueiros, e apoio financeiro do Pró Manejo. Verificouse que existe insegurança muito grande por parte dos comunitários sobre a continuidade destas
atividades após a saída da empresa.
Do ponto de vista técnico, o manejo florestal realizado em 2003, de maneira geral, continuou
atendendo aos P&C’s do FSC. A empresa mantém o planejamento detalhado das atividades, a
utilização de técnicas de impacto reduzido, e o monitoramento dos impactos e do crescimento
da floresta.
Entretanto, em 2003 houve uma alteração no que se refere a supervisão e responsabilidade
pelas atividades de manejo. Com a redução do quadro técnico da empresa, as atividades
florestais passaram a ser coordenadas diretamente pelo técnico de campo da empresa, Sr.
Rosiney. Novos funcionários foram treinados diretamente na área de manejo pelos próprios
funcionários mais eficientes. Verificou-se que este treinamento tem perdido bastante em
qualidade, e o manejo realizado vem sofrendo reflexos desta deficiência. Foram observadas
diversas árvores em um talhão manejado no início de 2003 que tiveram o corte realizado de
forma absolutamente inadequada, causando impactos significativos à floresta.
Outro ponto negativo observado foi a utilização de um buraco para disposição de resíduos da
oficina de manutenção de equipamentos. Neste buraco havia ferro velho, resíduos domésticos
(plásticos, latas..) e embalagens inutilizadas.
No que concerne aos aspectos sociais do manejo, pode-se dizer que as questões relativas às
condições trabalho estão incorporadas à empresa nos diferentes níveis de comando e de
execução de tarefas e são reconhecidas pela sociedade local. O único problema verificado em
relação aos trabalhadores, foi a existência de funcionários não registrados trabalhando no
restaurante que fornece alimentação para a equipe de campo. Este trabalho é terceirizado, mas
ocorre dentro da área de manejo, e assim, o cumprimento legal é de responsabilidade da
Gethal. Durante a auditoria, a equipe recebeu dos funcionários uma série de reclamações em
relação à qualidade da alimentação e falta de variedade nos cardápios servidos. A empresa não
conta com o auxílio técnico e monitoramento de um/uma nutricionista, o que agrava o
problema da qualidade da alimentação e equilíbrio nutricional.
As questões mais delicadas que hoje se colocam como desafio de trabalho para a empresa
dizem respeito à sua relação com a comunidade. As lideranças, moradores, pessoas que vivem
em Manicoré ainda esperam que a empresa traga algo de maior significado para o
desenvolvimento local. A comunidade tem a nítida
percepção de que ela não ganha com a
presença da empresa, que a geração de empregos e impostos é pouco perto da riqueza que a
empresa tira do município. Há quem pense que a empresa deveria fazer um beneficiamento da
madeira no local, gerando mais empregos.
Por outro lado há também uma opinião de que a empresa, quando estabelece alguma parceria,
como no caso do Projeto Castanha, não deixa claro qual o seu papel, gerando uma expectativa
de que tudo pode ser pedido para a empresa e que tudo acaba sendo negado porque a empresa
alega que não é esse seu papel. Segundo alguns líderes locais falta uma definição do papel
social da empresa, de um Plano de Trabalho entre a empresa e seus parceiros e isso estar claro
para a sociedade local.
Também se observou que há uma descrença nos compromissos assumidos pela empresa, como
no caso de um acordo de doação de madeira para o projeto de marcenaria realizado pelo padre
local, Sr. Mário, que alega que a empresa não cumpriu o que prometeu.
Surgiram questionamentos quanto aos compromissos assumidos com a certificação, pois
acredita-se que ela traz obrigações em relação à comunidade que a empresa não estaria
cumprindo e que portanto ou a empresa deve perder a certificação ou a certificação não tem
eficácia nenhuma em relação a essa questão. Esse é um problema claro de desinformação por
parte da comunidade local sobre o funcionamento do processo de certificação, e quais as
exigências existentes para a relação da operação certificada com a comunidade local. Essa
deficiência será melhor trabalhada pela certificadora nos próximos trabalhos realizados em
Manicoré.
Também surgiram opiniões de que se a empresa solicitar uma área maior para manejar e a
população local for consultada, muitos seriam contra a ampliação das áreas de manejo da
Gethal dentro do município de Manicoré.
De maneira geral, percebeu-se também que as lideranças e, conseqüentemente a própria
comunidade local, atribuem as ações realizadas pelo sr. Cardoso – atualmente contratado pela
empresa para intermediar a relação da empresa com a comunidade-, mais como esforço
pessoal dele e não da empresa. Esse fato deve ser trabalhado de forma que a imagem e a ação
do sr. Cardoso estejam vinculadas à empresa, porque a percepção existente é que a empresa
não apóia o sr. Cardoso de fato.
Outra questão que está gerando dúvidas diz respeito ao término da exploração das áreas
florestais próximas à Comunidade Democracia. A comunidade local está preocupada com a
manutenção do porto, que, segundo se analisa, com as chuvas e a falta de manutenção ficará
intransitável pois a terra será removida pela água, restando as grandes toras colocadas por
baixo. Também se perguntam se a empresa vai fazer uma recuperação do pátio que é um local
onde empoça água e pode ser prejudicial para os moradores. Nesse caso é necessário um
encontro com a comunidade para a discussão de medidas e um compromisso da empresa por
ações que minimizem os impactos da diminuição de suas atividades na área.
O que se observa é, em parte, desinformação da população local, que desconhece as ações
realizadas pela empresa, o alcance dos projetos sociais da castanha e da saúde, as tarefas, as
obrigações com a certificação e compromissos que a empresa assumiu para si em relação à
comunidade. Esse é um trabalho que a empresa não pode se furtar. É fundamental que seja
estabelecida uma comunicação mais eficiente, tanto levando a informação para a comunidade,
como trazendo informação da comunidade, isto é, ouvindo as demandas, os questionamentos,
as dúvidas; estabelecendo um diálogo mais eficaz entre a empresa e a comunidade.
Outro fator importante é a empresa estabelecer um diálogo mais formal com entidades e
lideranças locais no sentido de discutir temas de interesse das partes em questão, construir
uma agenda de ações conjuntas, definindo os papéis de cada uma das partes e esclarecer os
limites e os potenciais de ação da empresa.
1.5
Status das Condições e Ações Corretivas (CARs)
A. Sumário do Cumprimento das Condições
Das nove ações corretivas aplicáveis à esta auditoria, a Gethal cumpriu satisfatoriamente cinco
delas, e não cumpriu quatro. Em função disso, e de deficiências identificadas no
monitoramento, foram estabelecidas 10 novas ações corretivas com prazo de cumprimento em
outubro de 2004.
Cód.
Ação Corretiva
Prazo
Status
CAR
A partir dos dados de monitoramento (parcelas permanentes
CAR
01/2002
e avaliação de impactos pós exploratórios), desenvolver
prescrições silviculturais específicas para a área que incluam,
porém não se limitem à: (i) favorecimento da dispersão e
regeneração
de
sementes
de
espécies
comerciais;
(ii)
tratamentos silviculturais para crescimento e/ou regeneração
das espécies comerciais e (iv) definição de porta semente.
Outubro
Não
CAR
de 2003
cumprida
#01/2003
Apresentar anualmente a evolução e adaptação do plano de
CAR
02/2002
produção e sua compatibilidade com a estratégia de aumento
da base florestal que sustente tal acréscimo de produção.
Outubro
Cumprida
Outubro
Não
Outubro
Cumprida
de 2003
Tornar públicas e apresentar o andamento das discussões
CAR
03/2002
sobre as medidas mitigadoras do impacto à comunidade e
trabalhadores, relacionado a saída da empresa do Projeto
Democracia.
de 2003
cumprida
CAR
#02/2003
Apresentar um planejamento de ações com a comunidade que
CAR
04/2002
objetivem
principalmente
melhorar
o
desempenho
da
empresa em relação aos temas apontados pelos entrevistados
no estudo do IBENS.
de 2003
Apresentar os documentos finais de reconhecimento de posse
CAR
a ser concedido aos Srs. Mair Rocha de Chagas e Lucilo do
Cumprida
lote Chagas.
Imediato
CAR
Incluir uma seção sobre monitoramento de fauna no Plano de
Outubro
Não
CAR
06/2002
Manejo e no resumo público.
de 2003
cumprida
#03/2003
CAR
Apresentar o sistema de monitoramento de fauna e/ou
Outubro
Cumprida
05/2002
07/2002
espécies indicadoras de impacto, especialmente aquelas
de 2004
ameaçadas.
CAR
Apresentar um estudo que contemple uma avaliação sobre o
Outubro
Não
CAR
08/2002
impacto da empresa sobre a comunidade Vila Democracia.
de 2003
cumprida
#02/2003
Propor um novo Plano de Metas a ser apresentado aos
Outubro
Cumprida
CAR
09/2002
funcionários que leve em conta fatores que impedem a
execução
dos
trabalhos,
mas
que
responsabilidade das equipes de campo.
não
são
de
de 2003
B. Sumário de novas CARs solicitadas nesta auditoria.
Cód.
CAR #01/2003
Ação Corretiva
Prazo
Incorporar os resultados do monitoramento aos procedimentos de manejo
Outubro de
utilizados. Apresentar relatório com os resultados do monitoramento, e as
2004
novas prescrições técnicas adotadas. Incluir neste relatório (porém não se
limitar a) necessariamente os seguintes temas:
CAR #02/2003
ƒ
impactos sobre as populações de fauna;
ƒ
seleção de árvores de corte e definição de árvores matrizes;
ƒ
regeneração e crescimento das espécies manejadas;
ƒ
indicadores de impactos ambientais da exploração (pós-exploratório);
Elaborar e apresentar um plano de ações de mitigação dos impactos
Outubro de
relacionados à saída do Módulo Democracia. Realizar consulta prévia com os
2004
moradores da Comunidade Democracia, diretamente afetados pelas atividades
da empresa.
CAR #03/2003
CAR #04/2003
Incluir uma sessão sobre monitoramento de fauna no Plano de Manejo e no
Outubro de
Apresentar à certificadora a aos diferentes grupos de interesse envolvidos qual
Outubro de
o papel
2004
resumo público.
da empresa, os compromissos estabelecidos, e
as pessoas
2004
responsáveis em todas as ações desenvolvidas com a comunidade local
(Manicoré e comunidades) .
CAR #05/2003
Elaborar uma política de ações sociais da empresa que inclua objetivos e
Outubro de
metas, plano de ações, responsabilidades, orçamento disponível e cronograma
2004
de implantação. Apresentar e discutir essa política com os principais grupos
de interesse de Manicoré e região.
CAR #06/2003
Garantir o treinamento adequado dos funcionários da equipe de campo, de
Outubro de
modo a manter a qualidade do manejo realizado em todas as áreas da
2004
empresa.
CAR #07/2003
Desenvolver e implementar um plano de gestão dos resíduos do acampamento
Outubro de
e da oficina de máquinas de modo a garantir adequado manuseio e destinação
2004
Desenvolver mecanismos para garantir o cumprimento integral da legislação
Outubro de
trabalhista para funcionários terceirizados e próprios.
2004
Contar com o auxílio técnico de um/uma nutricionista na elaboração e
Outubro de
acompanhamento do cardápio de refeições fornecidas aos funcionários de
2004
de todos os resíduos existentes.
CAR #08/2003
CAR #09/2003
campo. Garantir uma alimentação de qualidade e nutricionalmente balanceada,
suficiente para a execução das atividades de manejo.
CAR #10/2003
Adotar um sistema de auditorias internas, de modo a monitorar ao menos os
seguintes itens: i) qualidade do manejo florestal realizado; ii) qualidade do
treinamento fornecido aos funcionários; iii) cumprimento adequado da
legislação trabalhista; iv) condições de máquinas e equipamentos utilizados; v)
condições de segurança e saúde do trabalhador. Apresentar anualmente ao
Imaflora um relatório com o resultado destas auditorias internas, e as ações
adotadas para corrigir as possíveis falhas encontradas.
Outubro de
2004