Orang Utan on Fire, Rambutan Tree, Palm Oil Tree or Coconut Tree?

Animal cruelty is unacceptable. Seeing pictures of it will make a person gorge and feels that something right needs to be done. Stop the cruelty. Stop what contributes to it. And this may  lead them to take  "advise" given on how it can stop this injustice act. And not all may have the time, interest to check the fact right, for taking the advise.

I select to blog about this because it was my first time to come across a topic of international conservation (animal, tree, or environment related) jumping to conclusion without getting their facts right and created a celebre. It happened on a facebook web page. Imagine if this has been circulated without people verifying first, what an impact it would have made, and in the case on the palm oil product industries.  

There are a lot of NGOs campaigning of uncontrolled conversion of natural forests to oil palm plantation that destroyed biodiversities and wild life habitats, especially orang utan. There are some facts in that, however in some case it has been misused and misunderstood.

Yesterday, I came across a post of an orang utan that was injured due to fire at palm oil plantation, here. Or at least, that was my first impression on the page when I "click" on my friend  "comment" about it adversely on facebook update column on the right. She said, it was very clear in the picture that is not palm oil tree!  On top of that, on a different picture, the International Animal Rescue Foundation Global Youth Team Project said that it was stuck on a rambutan tree, RAMBUTAN TREE! (=.=)

Photo source :

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=356334481116405&set=a.200289630054225.49843.200267936723061&type=3&theater 

What had happened was this orang utan was on the coconut tree for whatever reason and was spotted by the villagers. They tried to get rid of the orang utan by smoking it away, has unfortunately set her alight. The villagers said they had simply been trying to persuade the animal to move away and not to eat their fruit. She was hiding in HER tree when HER habitat had been disturbed. She was hiding in their fruit tree in the village of Lower Wajok in West Kalimantan, Indonesia as they presume her habitat has been disturbed.

Photo source : 
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php fbid=356334481116405&set=a.200289630054225.49843.200267936723061&type=3&theater 

And this makes me wonder how  an international animal rescue team can't get their tree facts right!  Its too obvious!

Photo source : 
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=356334481116405&set=a.200289630054225.49843.200267936723061&type=3&theater 

** FYI, my friend is neither a forester or environmentalist, but who needs to be either one of these professions to identift that is a coconut tree ???

There were several earlier comments on this page (has been deleted) on how oil palm plantation impact that drives the orang utan away from the forest area into the nearby village. And that consumer should be concern and ban using palm oil product. Several concerned  people commented that they will take action on reading the label of their food products, ensuring no palm oil content before purchasing. My friend defended that major palm oil plantation holders vastly in Malaysia and Indonesia through has been certified under Responsible Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO), through the  supply chain audit and responsible purchasing were able to ensure their plantation does come from area identified with high conversation value forest area (HCVF). Besides that, orang utan don't like palm oil fruits. 

The orang utan has been rescued by the International Animal Rescue Foundation Global Youth Team Project  team in Indonesia. They done a reasonable job for rescuing the orang utan and hopefully will continue to nurture the orang utan until she is stable; the whole incident can be view on the online news website, here. 

~Thank you for reading~

** Wondering why there is a good picture of the orang utan on the tree before the fire, then on fire and after fire? The pictures of the whole process.. Hmmm...**

Update on Lacey Act and Gibson Guitar : Confiscation of Ebony & Rosewood from India and Madagascar

Previously blogged about it over here.  

In 07 August 2012,  BBC reported : Gibson settles discord for timber 

Who is being held in account?

Nashville base Gibson

How was it settle? 
Gibson admitted violating the Lacey Act, which requires firm to know the timber use is  legally obtained. 

How much it is being fine?

USD 300,000 fine and USD 50,000 for community payment 

Also includes confiscation of ebony and rosewood worths USD 500,000 from India and Madagascar.

What is the community payment for Gibson Guitar?

Gibson Guitar shall further provide a community service payment of  USD 50,000 to the FWS to be used to promote conservation, identification and propagation of protected tree species used in the musical instrument industry and the forest where those species are found. 

What are the others responsible to be carried by Gibson Guitar?

Gibson shall also implement a compliance program designed to strengthen its compliance controls and procedures. 

In related civil forfeiture actions, Gibson shall withdraw its claims to the wood seized in the course of the criminal investigation, including Madagascar ebony shipment with a total invoice value of USD 261, 844. 

How did it started?

Back in 2010 and 2011, Gibson's premises were raided by the US Fish And Wildlife (FWS) services, with agents impounding ebony and rosewood imported from Madagascar and India. 

What was the evidence?

The FWS found evidence that an employee had told Gibson two years previously that its Madagascar imports might be illegal, but that the company had nevertheless ordered further stocks. 

Further information can be read in the article release by the US Department of Justice , and a quote of the overall scenario here,  

Madagascar Ebony is a slow-growing tree species and supplies are considered threatened in its native environment due to over-exploitation.   Both legal and illegal logging of Madagascar Ebony and other tree species have significantly reduced Madagascar’s forest cover. Madagascar’s forests are home to many rare endemic species of plants and animals .  The harvest of ebony in and export of unfinished ebony from, Madagascar has been banned since 2006.

Gibson purchased “fingerboard blanks,” consisting of sawn boards of Madagascar ebony, for use in manufacturing guitars.   The Madagascar ebony fingerboard blanks were ordered from a supplier who obtained them from an exporter in Madagascar.   Gibson’s supplier continued to receive Madagascar ebony fingerboard blanks from its Madagascar exporter after the 2006 ban.   The Madagascar exporter did not have authority to export ebony fingerboard blanks after the law issued in Madagascar in 2006.    

In 2008, an employee of Gibson participated in a trip to Madagascar, sponsored by a non-profit organization.   Participants on the trip, including the Gibson employee, were told that a law passed in 2006 in Madagascar banned the harvest of ebony and the export of any ebony products that were not in finished form.   They were further told by trip organizers that instrument parts, such as fingerboard blanks, would be considered unfinished and therefore illegal to export under the 2006 law.  Participants also visited the facility of the exporter in Madagascar, from which Gibson’s supplier sourced its Madagascar ebony, and were informed that the wood at the facility was under seizure at that time and could not be moved.     

After the Gibson employee returned from Madagascar with this information, he conveyed the information to superiors and others at Gibson.   The information received by the Gibson employee during the June 2008 trip, and sent to company management by the employee and others following the June 2008 trip, was not further investigated or acted upon prior to Gibson continuing to place orders with its supplier.   Gibson received four shipments of Madagascar ebony fingerboard blanks from its supplier between October 2008 and September 2009.

As a result of this investigation and criminal enforcement agreement, Gibson has acknowledged that it failed to act on information that purchasing Madagascar ebony may have violated laws intended to limit over harvesting and conserve valuable wood species from Madagascar, a country which has been severely impacted by deforestation.

What are the rationale and related to EU Timber Regulation, that will come in force in March 2013?

The Environmental Investigation Agency (EIA) welcomes the resolution of this landmark case as both vindication (clear of blame / suspicion) of the amended Lacey Act itself, but also a clear precedent for E.U. government to implement the EU Timber Regulation

Faith Doherty, Head of Forests Campaigns at EIA’s UK office – which has spearheaded the development of the EU Timber Regulation – agreed.

“This landmark case sets a clear benchmark for European governments in their enforcement of the EU Timber Regulation from March 2013”, said Doherty, adding that “despite significant corporate and political resistance to justice, the U.S. government has this week demonstrated that principled enforcement of historic laws prohibiting illegal timber trade is both possible, and much needed, and we expect Europe to ensure EU law has the same effect.” 

Both the Lacey Act and the EU Timber Regulation explicitly prohibit trade in illegal timber in the U.S. and EU markets respectively, and both laws mandate timber companies to exercise “due care” or “due diligence” when purchasing and placing timber on the market.

While the Lacey Act came into force in May 2008, the EU Timber Regulation comes into force in March 2013.

In the EU, EIA is working to ensure member states are prepared for the implementation of the Timber Regulation, and that adequate political and financial resources are being deployed to ensure effective yet efficient enforcement is prioritized.  EIA is also working to ensure member states adopt adequate and harmonized penalties for breaches of the law – and are highlighting the penalties faced by Gibson as a step in the right direction. 

Doherty said: “We hope EU governments and traders have taken note of the Gibson case. Only through the forfeiture of hundreds of thousands of dollars of illegal wood, and similarly high fines, will unscrupulous actors in the timber trade be dissuaded from disregarding both the environment and the law. This is also a very clear message to suppliers of wood worldwide. There is no room for illegally sourced timber or wood products in the market. We now have the law to help us. “

What would had happen if Gibson did not settle?

While the agreement suggests that Gibson Guitars knowingly imported illegal wood from Madagascar. It is a crime punishable by up to five years in prison and hefty fines  and perhaps deserved a bigger penalty, Gibson has for now avoided all criminal charges for its conduct.  Companies should take note of the facts in this case and the significant penalties incurred, as well as the due care specifications outlined in the agreement. The US is taking the Lacey Act seriously and future prosecutions may not be so generous.

A more detail article of overall prosecution upon Gibson Guitar case is available in EIA website reported by Lisa Handy, Senior Policy Advisor USA.

My thoughts about this

US Lacey Act amended in 2008 was introduced without any sort of preparation for the importers and importing countries. It is a single window method, and there is no get-out-of-jail free card. Do the due care and correct declaration to identify the source and species type is part of the process to ensure you are "not knowingly" an irresponsible purchaser. 

EU Timber Regulation is slightly complex. The Voluntary Partnership Agreement (VPA) between EU and the partnering countries is to minimize the risk of the woods coming from illegal source, where raw wood materials are from various sources or exploiting tree species listed in CITES (Centre for International Trade of Endanger Species). And, this case does not enable us to visualise what would happen if the timbers sourcing from various timber are not traceable.  What happen if the wood is not traceable back to the origin? And if the wood is found to be illegally traded (for it is source of illegal, controversial or endanger species) are from the partnering countries, what would the scenario be like? 

What is CITES?

CITES (the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora) is an international agreement between governments. Its aim is to ensure that international trade in specimens of wild animals and plants does not threaten their survival. 

~Thank you for reading~

Article Review: CIFOR Blog:: New timber tracking tools to bolster global fight against illegal logging

The post iss related to the new tracking method to curb illegal logging through tracing the species DNA that was discussed in the workshop held in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.  The studies using DNA market to identify timber species and analyze genetic variation in the forest has been carried out for more than ten years. This system is coherent with the existing  EU FLEGT requirement and Lacey Act that has been debating to minimize the risk of illegal logging timber products to enter EU and US market.

What is it about?

The Global Timber Tracking Network (GTTN) promotes the use of innovative control tools based on the application of DNA and stable isotope research to identify timber species and trace their origins. The Global Timber Tracking Network aims to create a global database featuring genetic and stable isotope markers for commonly traded timber species, a landmark tool designed to reinforce certification standards and legislation and to complement existing paper-based documentation that can be easily falsified. 

How does it work?

Through the DNA and stable isotope markers as the legit information (as indicator in the assessor checklist) enter into the database, where is also accessible to the importers. This  enables to importers to verify the precise species and origin of wood and wood products and provide tangible proof that the products were genuinely derived from a sustainably managed forest or other legally harvested timber.  


How would the wood sample be?

To create the database shall require integrating data generated by different research techniques and that has been collected by scientist working in various location around the world. 


What are the equipment use to test the wood sample, what are the total sample need to quantify and how long does it takes?  

A global standard (i.e.: similar FSC standard) for sampling and lab analysis of genetic and stable isotope data shall be establish in order to ensure the technique used to gather and analyze the data are repeatable and verifiable. 


Any successful pilot project? 

To date, just a handful of projects have created individual databases for certain timber species. 

Malaysia

The Forest Research Institute of Malaysia (FRIM) established an early database of tropical timber species using DNA fingerprinting data. The FRIM database has genetic data for:

1. chengal (Neobalanocarpus heimii) -IUCN Red List
2. ramin (Gonystylus bancanus) -IUCN Red List
3. kempas (Koompassia malaccensis) (Traded Timber Species) (WIP) and 
4. meranti bukit (Shorea platyclados)  (Traded Timber Species) (WIP)

Currently, the GTTN database shall be test whether the data generated by analyses of wood samples match the stated species and origin on the product label.

Africa

Double Helix will design and implement DNA Chain-of-Custody systems for several supply chains. To achieve this we are actively working with government partners, concession owners/managers and community groups. The project will create DNA barcodes for twenty important African timber species and will generate a map of genetic variation across the different participating countries for three commercial tree species: Ayou (Triplochiton scleroxylon), Iroko (Milicia sp.) and Sapele (Entandrophragma cylindricum). By the end of the project, the trade and Governments will have the ability to verify the species and origin of harvest of these timber species. It will provide a scientific, cost-effective method to verify claims and other supply chain documentation, enforce legislation and exclude illegally harvested timber from being laundered through legitimate supply chains. The genetic reference databases will be held by Bioversity International in Malaysia, the international coordination office for tree identification and origin assignment. Below are the countries covered under this project.

What are the major challenges or obstacle?

In Brazil, a key timber-producing nation believed to have the world’s greatest biodiversity of plant species, correctly identifying timber species is especially challenging, said Milton Kanashiro, a research geneticist at the Brazilian Agricultural Research Corporation (EMBRAPA). “Identifying species is a big problem in Brazil. Different species of trees often end up getting classified under one species because it can be difficult to properly identify so many species in the field,” Kanashiro said. “If species are not identified, we could be losing biodiversity without knowing it. And if you don’t know you are losing a species, you cannot properly protect it.”

My opinion of the major challenges for DNA Timber Tracking:

1. Reaching agreement on standards may be the most difficult aspect of making the timber tracking system operational.
2. The research takes time, have not fully define total isotopes needed for isotope marking
3. At present only covers endanger species, and several tree species have overlaps of isotopes marker.
4. Questionable about the type of equipment needed for the importer or the require knowledge by the importer to ensure they understand the system and also does not take a very long time to verify the legality of the timber in the port.

Article Review: VPA Partner Countries (Current Status)

Find this very useful to update keep up with the current status of the FLEGT VPA partnering countries

 

System Development (TLAS)

Indonesia

Cameroon

C.A.R.

Congo

Ghana

Liberia

Formal Negotiations

Malaysia

Vietnam

D.R.C

Gabon

Moving to negotiation

Thailand

Laos

Article Review: Deforestation and Reduce Impact Logging?

According to the United Nation’s Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the 33 million acres of forestland that are lost annually around the globe are responsible for 20 percent of human-caused greenhouse gas emissions. And  the bigger part that contribute to forest loss is deforestation activities.

Came across this post last week, and thought it would be good to review it to recite my memory about deforestation and what I have been working about recently. And the first paragraph caught my eyes was:

Trees are one of the human race’s most valuable resources, and yet we cut and consume them at the rate of 3-6 billion (stands??) a year. What other thing, natural or man made, can absorb carbon dioxide, produce oxygen, clean the soil, prevent erosion and control noise pollution, using only free solar energy?

Deforestation is one of the planet’s most dire environmental issues, and  few people realize that by eliminating our forests, we’re actually signing our own death sentence.

What is deforestation?

Deforestation is the removal of a forest or stand of trees where the land is thereafter converted to a nonforest use.  Examples of deforestation include conversion of forestland to farms, ranches, or urban use.The term deforestation refers to the slow but steady elimination of the Earth’s mature forests. There are many reasons for cutting down trees, but most are felled for profit or to make room for massive commercial agricultural operations. Depending on the species, it can take many decades for a tree to reach maturity.

What is the cause of deforestation?

Trees felled for source of timber or charcoal. The cleared land used as pasture for lifestock, agriculture such as oil palm, plantation for comodities or settlements.

War. Deforestation has also been used in war to deprive an enemy of cover for its forces and also vital resources. A modern example of this, for example, was the use of Agent orange in Vietnam. Deforested regions typically incur significant adverse soil erosion and frequently degrade into wasteland

What are the most destructive tools in deforestation?

Clear cutting is a traumatic process whereby all the trees in a given tract of land are felled and removed.  Although the area may be reseeded with young trees, it can take decades before those trees are absorbing carbon dioxide and emitting oxygen at pre-clearcut levels. 

Why clear cutting is destructive?

According to the NRDC, clearcutting can destroy an area’s ecological integrity in a number of other ways, including:

Ø  the destruction of buffer zones which reduce the severity of flooding by absorbing and holding water;

Ø  the immediate removal of forest canopy, which destroys the habitat for many rainforest-dependent insects and bacteria;

Ø  the elimination of fish and wildlife species due to soil erosion and habitat loss;

Ø  the removal of underground worms, fungi and bacteria that condition soil and protect plants growing in it from disease;

Ø  the loss of samall-scale economic opportunities, such as fruit-picking, sap extraction, and rubber tapping; and

Ø  the destruction of aesthetic values and recreational opportunities.

What are the alternatives to clear cutting?

We cannot stop or ban abruptly forest loss activities such as timber felling or land clearing as it is somehow link to human and/or country economic development. In recent years, the environmental NGO's successfully push public awareness to the public being responsible upon their purchasing, daily usage of wood materials and also banning support to illegal logging, which accounts a significant sum to deforestation. In terms of technicality in the forest, a different tree harvesting method such as Selective Harvesting System or Reduce Impact Logging  has been put in place, made as legislation for harvesting in several countries to reduce the impact of sudden loss in the forest.

What is Reduce Impact Logging (RIL)?

Reduced impact logging can be defined as 'the intensively planned and carefully controlled implementation of timber harvesting operations to minimise the environmental impact on forest stands and soils'.

And what are the practice involves?

1.  a pre-harvest inventory and the mapping of individual crop trees;

2. the pre-harvesting planning of roads, skid trails and landings to minimise soil disturbance and to protect streams and waterways with appropriate crossings;

3. pre-harvest vine-cutting in areas where heavy vines connect tree crowns;

4. the construction of roads, landings and skid trails following environmentally friendly design guidelines;

5. the use of appropriate felling and bucking techniques including directional felling, cutting stumps low to the ground to avoid waste, and the optimal crosscutting of tree stems into logs in a way that maximises the recovery of useful wood;

6. the winching of logs to planned skid trails and ensuring that skidding machines remain on the trails at all times;

7. where feasible, using yarding systems that protect soils and residual vegetation by suspending logs above the ground or by otherwise minimising soil disturbance; and

8. conducting a post-harvest assessment in order to provide feedback to the resource manager and logging crews and to evaluate the degree to which the RIL guidelines were successfully applied. 

Other than environmental benefits, RIL has been shown to reduce the percentage of 'lost' logs (those trees that are felled in the forest but not extracted because they aren't seen by tractor operators), thereby reducing timber wastage.

Any successful projects about RIL?

There are many RIL projects with collaboration with ITTO. Through its project program it provides training in RIL procedures; for example, one project in the Brazilian Amazon provided training in better logging to 138 operators and assisted several logging companies to achieve the certification of their operations. A new phase of this project commenced in 2003, and similar projects are under way in Indonesia, Guyana and Cambodia. Global Forestry Services is currently monitoring the overall RIL harvesting method in Sabah, Malaysia from 2010 until 2015. 

Hollow tree: A normal practice under Reduce Impact Logging harvesting technique where before felling a tree in the forest, the timber feller will knock on the tree or "poke" the tree with the "parang" to check for tree hollowness. If a tree marked for felling is hollow, it will be retain and not felled as there is no market value and left behind for habitat or ecology purposes.

Article Review: EU “Timber” Regulation (Regulation (EU) No 995/2010)

A short review about EU Timber Regulation base on this post.

What is EU "Timber" Regulation?

In October 2010 the EU adopted a new Timber Regulation  to combat trade in illegally harvested timber. This is one of a number of actions under the 2003 EU Action Plan on Forest Law Enforcement Governance and Trade (FLEGT).

Why EU 'Timber" Regulation?

1. EU FLEGT Action Plan (2003)

Spurred by discussions at the East Asia FLEG conference in September 2001, the European Commission published its Action Plan on Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade (FLEGT) in May 2003. Approved by the Council of the EU in October 2003, it included the following proposals:

• Negotiation of bilateral FLEGT voluntary partnership agreements (VPAs) with producer countries. The VPAs will feature a licensing system designed to identify legal products exported from partner countries and license them for import to the EU; unlicensed products will be denied entry. (See Voluntary Partnership Agreements page.)
• Capacity-building assistance to partner countries to set up the licensing scheme, improve enforcement and, where necessary, reform their laws.
• Examination of EU member states' existing domestic legislation, and consideration of additional legislative options, to prohibit the import of illegal timber. (See EU FLEGT: Timber Regulation.)
• Encouragement for the use of government procurement policy to limit purchases to legal (and sustainable) sources. (See Public Procurement page.)
• Encouragement for voluntary industry initiatives to control their own supply chains, and thereby exclude illegal products. (See Supply Chain Management page.)
• Encouragement for financial institutions to scrutinise flows of finance to the forestry industry. (See Banks and Finance page.) 

2. FLEGT Regulation (2005)- Voluntary Partnership Agreements (VPA)

A key element of the FLEGT Action Plan is a voluntary scheme to ensure that only legally harvested timber is imported into the EU from countries agreeing to take part in this scheme. The internal EU legal framework for this scheme is a Regulation adopted in December 2005, and a 2008 Implementing Regulation, allowing for the control of the entry of timber to the EU from countries entering into bilateral FLEGT Voluntary Partnership Agreements (VPA) with the EU.  Once agreed, the VPAs will include commitments and action from both parties to halt trade in illegal timber, notably with a license scheme to verify the legality of timber exported to the EU. The agreements also promote better enforcement of forest law and promote an inclusive approach involving civil society and the private sector.

How to implement and what is the obligation?

1. Due Diligence- "operators" shall use procedures and measures called "due diligence system" (DDS)

The core of the ‘due diligence’ notion is that operators have to undertake a risk management exercise so as to minimize the risk of placing illegally harvested timber, or timber products containing illegally harvested timber, on the EU market.

The three key elements of the “due diligence system” are:

• Information: The operator must have access to information describing the timber and timber products, country of harvest, quantity, details of the supplier and information on compliance with national legislation.
• Risk assessment: The operator should assess the risk of illegal timber in his supply chain, based on the information identified above and taking into account criteria set out in the regulation.
• Risk mitigation: When the assessment shows that there is a risk of illegal timber in the supply chain that risk can be mitigated by requiring additional information and verification from his supplier

  

Source of the picture above: FLEGT June 2012 capacity4dev

 

2. Prohibition to place illegally harvested timber or timber products on the EU market

Through Timber Legality Assurance System (TLAS) of each own country. Source the timber back to the forest license area.

3. Traceability -"Traders" shall be identified to their suppliers and customer

Through the central point of expertise for timber procurement website provides online information on how to meet the UK Government’s Timber Procurement Policy, the EU Timber Regulation and the Forest Law Enforcement Governance and Trade (FLEGT) Regulation.

What is the product scope?

Listed in Annex using EU Custom codes. Covers a wide range of timber products (solid wood products, flooring, plywood, pulp) and includes  printed papers such as books, magazines and newspapers. The product scope can be amended if necessary. The Regulation applies to both imported and domestically produced timber and timber products. Timber and timber products covered by valid FLEGT or CITES licenses are considered to comply with the requirements of the Regulation. 

Does not cover waste and recycled products, packaging material to support or carry another product, certain bamboo and rattan products or other products not listed in Annex (e.g.: toys, musical instruments). Maybe amended to include other products

What is illegally harvested timber?

Harvested in contravention of the applicable legislation in the country of harvest such  as 

1. Legal rights to harvest
2. Taxes and fees linked to harvesting
3. Compliance with timber harvesting laws, including directly related environmental and forest legislation
4. Respect for third parties tenure/use rights
5. Relevant trade and customs rules

Who is liable?

“Operators” = any natural or legal person who places timber or timber products on the EU market.  Liable for exercising of due diligence and prohibition

"Traders” = any natural or legal person who trades on the internal market timber or timber products already placed on the market. Liable for the “traceability”

Who checks? Role of the member state 

Competent authorities =national government bodies responsible for the application and enforcement. This means looking into operators, monitoring organizations (selected from 27 EU member states)  and reports.  List of CA can be found here.  Penalties: effective, proportionate and dissuasive penalties

 

How does FLEGT and CITES licenses work?

Products covered by FLEGT or CITES licenses are considered to have been legally harvested for the purposed of the EU Timber Regulation. Means by importing FLEGT or CITES licenses timber, due diligence is exercised.

How about 3rd party verification?

Does not enjoy the "green lane" as FLEGT or CITES license. May be taken into account in the risk assessment and risk mitigation procedures if cover compliance with applicable legislation and if considered credible. Criteria for assessing their credibility in the implementing regulation.

When will EU Timber Regulation take place?

3rd of March 2013

Secondary legislation:

April / June 2012 a delegated Regulation on the procedural rules for the recognition and withdrawal of recognition of monitoring organization (selected from 27 EU member states)

June 2012 an implementing Regulation on the detailed rules concerning the due diligence system, the frequency and nature of the checks on monitoring organizations.

My Forest Shoes

Its been almost 3 weeks since I last posted an entry, so inefficient that  there was not even one entry for the first half of April. Will try to be more consistent in blogging.

As any girls/ladies/woman/aunties in any age, beautiful shoes are desired and often a thing status to show that she have great taste, a style whether choosing the type of shoes to wear and also, status. Especially the type of shoes wear to work. Generally working class ladies wear heels, flats, sneakers, running shoes, sandals, and probably fashionable boots to work as their work space permit them to do so. 

For the past 2 years, that is not for the type of shoes I can wear to work, especially in the tropical rain forest. There are indeed many types of rubber wear shoes design for forest hiking and trekking, probably very good for leisure or weekend trips to the hill. Or in the temperate forest (West Countries), a good Timber brand shoes is prefer as it looks much tough and rugged, very reliable as the base is rubber made, however, easily to be slipped off or being dunk into the muddiness of the soil in the tropical rain forest. 

Hence, most of the workers in the tropical rain forest normally wear either the look-a-like Phua Chu Kang yellow boots ...

haha, or something like this:

This rubber shoes was name "adidas kampung". The reason was because of the strips on it is similar to the Adidas strips. "Kampung" means village. It comes in either black or white. And, this was what I encountered last in my recent trip.

But I am not the only one..

And to that reason, it has that inspired me to write a post about it was my feminine instinct felt pity on me for most of my peers are wearing beautiful or at least normal looking shoes every day to work, whilst I wear a rubber shoes or probably the cheapest working shoes  (cost not more than USD 2.50 per pair) to work. And probably, the most durable, reusable and sensible shoes to wear into the forest every week. The reason : easy to wear, easy to wash, the shoe base is design to walk on the mud steadier, enable a person to balance on the slippery fallen tree and canopies to cross from one end to another, and it is darn cheap! However, you can't find this foot wear anywhere else except Sabah! 

Not trying to complain, but wishing back for the time wear I can wear shoes like this to work too! :)

Christian Louboutin Nude Shoes with Sparkling Stilettos

 Alexandar Wang Heels (from Wendy's Lookbook)

And if, they don't cost USD 400 and more too. Have a good Monday! :)