conserve ironwood (ulin) stands? An option and approach in East Kalimantan
Wahyuni, T.
Citation
Wahyuni, T. (2011, November 10). Can traditional forest management protect and conserve ironwood (ulin) stands? An option and approach in East Kalimantan. Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/1887/18056
Version: Not Applicable (or Unknown)
License: Licence agreement concerning inclusion of doctoral thesis in the Institutional Repository of the University of Leiden
Downloaded from: https://hdl.handle.net/1887/18056
Note: To cite this publication please use the final published version (if applicable).
2
2.1. Introduction
This chapter provides an overview of East Kalimantan in general and the three districts of Paser, Nunukan and Kutai Kartanegara in particular where the research was conducted. It covers the location, climate and geography, the land use systems and forest activities, as well as social-economic factors and human population. This chapter also examines the situation following the introduction of a policy of decentralization in 1998, which resulted in drastic political and economy changes, including an increase in local government revenues, a reduction in the role of forests in government revenues, an increase in the number of districts and the construction of many new district capitals and infrastructure facilities in the province.
The chapter also discusses the methods used to analyse traditional forest management systems related to the management of ironwood, an inventory of the natural distribution of ironwood, the cultivation knowledge held by indigenous people, the current trade of ironwood products in East Kalimantan, as well as ironwood conservation efforts. The methods were developed based on references by botanists (Keßler & Sidiyasa 1994;
Slik et al. 2007), ecologists (Suselo 1987; MacKinnon 1992), silviculturists (Masano &
Omon 1983), economic-anthropologists (Dove 1988; Padoch & Peluso 1996; Peluso 1983, 1992) and anthropologists (Obidzinski 2003). The research is also supported by historical information about ironwood in Borneo and Kalimantan from various sources (Knapen 2001; Wadley 2005), including colonial literature.
East Kalimantan is one of the richest provinces in Indonesia in terms of natural resources. The diversity of ethnic groups that live in this area reflects the diversity of resource control and tenure systems. Generally, within the communities of East Kalimantan, resources concentrated in a particular area (such as birds’ nest caves) can be considered private property. Some wild resources, such as rattan, are also domesticated
and planted by villagers in areas where they are abundant (Eghenter 2000b). However, scattered resources, such as gaharu or agarwood (Aquilaria spp.) (Momberg et al. 1997) and ironwood, tend to become common property because it is difficult to privatise these resources or allocate them to individuals.
The changing economic importance of the province has also resulted in considerable social changes. Until two centuries ago, the majority of the inhabitants of the coasts and riverbanks of Kalimantan (the Indonesian part of Borneo) were Malay people, while indigenous inhabitants lived in the interiors. Gradually, other ethnic groups came to claim their economic niche: the Chinese, the Bugis from Sulawesi, and later people from other islands in the archipelago. This last group came as transmigrants or as spontaneous migrants. Their influx consistently pushed back the native Dayak people to more remote places. Along with booming timber and oil exploitation came at significant opening up of large parts of East Kalimantan. This was followed by large-scale agricultural development projects, which continue today. The native farmers, living in the remoter interiors, subsist on upland rice cultivation, produced in annually cleared swiddens.
2.2. East Kalimantan province Location
The province of East Kalimantan is one of 33 provinces in Indonesia. It is located in the Kalimantan region on the eastern side of Borneo Island (see fig.2.1) between 04°024’
north latitude – 02°25’ south latitude and 113°44’ – 119°00’ east longitude. Its surface area is equal to 1.5 times the surface of Java and the Madura Islands combined (see fig.2.1). The province borders the neighbouring country of Malaysia and specifically, its states of Sabah and Sarawak (Statistics for East Kalimantan Province, www.kaltim.
bps.go.id).
The national and international borders of the East Kalimantan can be summarised as follows:
• In the north, the province borders Sabah state (eastern Malaysia).
• In the east, it meets Makassar Bay and the Sea of Sulawesi.
• Its southern is adjacent to South Kalimantan province.
• In the west, East Kalimantan borders Central Kalimantan, West Kalimantan and the Malaysian state of Sarawak.
Climate and geography
The province of East Kalimantan has a tropical climate. In 2009, the climatic conditions of the province reflected the patterns of a tropical zone of high humidity (an average of 80 per cent), with an average monthly rainfall of 122-267 mm, an average temperature of 23.42o-32.62o Celsius, and low wind speed (0.7–8 knots). The average annual temperature of East Kalimantan is 26° Celsius and the maximum temperature is between 22.6° and 35° Celsius. The average humidity is 1001.82 milli bares and the average rain fall is 19 mm per year (Statistics for East Kalimantan Province 2010, www.kaltim.bps.
go.id). Climatic changes are caused by the fact that a major part of this province consists of forest.
East Kalimantan has an undulating topography. The southern part of the province is a relatively urbanised area with fertile agricultural land and a well-developed road network. The remainders of the province is largely covered with rain forest and very sparsely populated. Road connections within the province and to other parts of Kalimantan are developing, which explains the relative importance of air and sea transport. The national road system in East Kalimantan covers 9,878.78 km, with 1,762 km of provincial roads and 8,116 km of regency roads (Statistics for East Kalimantan Province 2010, www.kaltim.bps.go.id). The province has a large network of rivers, which constitute the main route for communication and transport. Indeed, rivers are essential to people of East Kalimantan as traffic lanes for water transportation, water supply and habitat for aquatic fauna.
Land use
The province of East Kalimantan is the second largest Indonesian province, after Papua province. Administratively, the province is divided into ten districts or kabupatens and four municipalities or kotamadyas: Balikpapan, Samarinda, Bontang and Tarakan.
The latter two fast growing towns have been designated as new municipalities. The districts are: Paser and Penajam North Paser (in the south) and Kutai Kartanegara, East Kutai, West Kutai, Berau, Malinau, Nunukan, Bulungan and Tana Tidung (in the north). Samarinda is the provincial capital. Three of these districts have been selected for in-depth study for this thesis; namely, Paser (in relation natural distribution and traditional forest management of ironwood); Nunukan (cultivation and conservation efforts of ironwood) and Kutai Kartangera (the chain of production to consumption) (see fig.2.1). East Kalimantan covers approximately 208,657.17 km2. This comprises 198,441.17 km2 (95.10 per cent) land and 10,216.57 km2 (4.90 per cent) seawaters, which is about 10.47 per cent of the total Indonesian land area. East Kalimantan land is used for industry (0.13 per cent), rice fields (2.07 per cent), plantation (2.20 per cent), forest (93.5 per cent), irrigation and others (2.13 per cent) (Statistics for East Kalimantan Province 2010, www.kaltim.bps.go.id).
Figure 2.1. Map of East Kalimantan and the location of the research areas
East Kalimantan has areas of forest, agricultural areas, shifting cultivation and plantations for oil palm. The development of timber estates and oil palm plantations has increased the conversion of forest areas. This conversion has particularly increased in recent years in areas where the national policy for developing two million hectares of oil palm is being implemented (FWI/GFW 2002). East Kalimantan is one of the Indonesian provinces involved in this policy implementation. Following a drastic reduction of labour in the forestry industry sector since 2001, oil palm has been valued as an important source of employment opportunities. This oil palm policy was also
Kutai Kartanegara District Paser District
Nunukan District
triggered by the condition that many parts of former logging concessions are viewed as unproductive land and are seen as prime locations for conversion to oil palm plantations.
Based on the Statistics for East Kalimantan 2005, since 1980s, close to 600,000 ha of forest areas have been converted for oil palm plantation and another 1.6 million ha have been converted for the settlement of transmigrant, road construction, industrial estates and timber estate areas.
Throughout East Kalimantan, road building and deforestation are closely linked.
Construction of roads and the trans-highway have encouraged colonisation, which, in turn, has led to deforestation of large areas of lowland tropical forests. Logging companies also require roads that provide entry points for additional settlers into forested areas, thereby increasing the deforestation pressures of colonisation. Economic growth during the late 1970s exerted various influences on local communities, such as easier access to boat engines and chainsaws, along with increasing exposure to national programmes of education and health-care. Outside influences further increased when, in the 1990s, mining companies began to encroach into the area and had a growing impact on the forest resources and immigration. The economic crisis in Indonesia (which began in 1997) has driven further changes. The depreciation of the Indonesian currency and the increase in the export market value of palm oil and mining products has led to a rapid expansion of prospecting, often by poorly regulated private investors.
Human population and socio economic factors
Based on the population census in the middle of 2010, the human population in East Kalimantan was recorded at 3,550,589 people, with a population density of 18 people per km2 (Statistics for East Kalimantan 2010, www.kaltim.bps.go.id). Statistically, the province is an extreme case. It is one of the largest but least populated and it is also one of the wealthiest provinces of Indonesia. Although it has a population of 3 million, per capita income in the province is over twice the national average. Much of this wealth is derived from the extraction of mineral and natural resources, the most important of which are oil, natural gas and timber.
The current inhabitants of East Kalimantan reflect a new diversity, which is, in part, due to the transmigration programmes that shift people from the more populated islands and the government policy of establishing settlements for retired police and army offices.
The province’s population growth has also been influenced by the influx of spontaneous migrants from Java, Madura, Sumatra, Bali and Sulawesi. Consequently, major social changes are taking place as the long-time ethnic mix of Dayaks, Malays and Chinese is expanded and diversified (Rahim 2001; Moeliono et al. 2008). Migrant community needs and claims over land are typically unrepresented, except in government-sponsored transmigration sites. As stated, since the 1970s, East Kalimantan has been targeted by various transmigration programmes. A number of people have moved in from islands, such as Java, Bali and Lombok, while others, in particular Bugis, have come to the
province from Sulawesi. This situation has often generated conflicts between larger commercial users or state-sponsored development projects and local communities.
East Kalimantan is known for its natural resources, which account for its status as one of the richest provinces in Indonesia. Vastly endowed with wood, coal, oil, gas, methanol, silver and gold, East Kalimantan’s gross domestic regional product (PDRB) reached Rp. 281.4 trillion in 2009. The mining and quarrying sectors contributed the largest share, amounting to 47.13 per cent of the total of PDRB. This was followed by the manufacturing industry and trade, and hotels and restaurants, with 26.78 per cent and 7.74 per cent, respectively. The leading commodities of non-gas and non-oil commodities in the province include palm oil (CPO), coconut, rubber and fisheries.
The export of the non-gas and non-oil commodities obtained US$ 9.6 billion (Statistics for East Kalimantan Province 2010, www.kaltim.bps.go.id).
2.3. Research sites
2.3.1. Research village and site selection
The research sites for this study - Paser, Nunukan and Kutai Kartanegara districts - were chosen because they each represent different issues related to ironwood: traditional forest management, cultivation and conservation efforts by indigenous people and the chain of production to consumption of ironwood products. Each district has a different situation and infrastructure.
For my study of traditional ironwood conservation efforts by indigenous people, research and fieldwork was conducted primarily in villages: dusun (hamlet) Muluy in Kecamatan (sub-district) Muara Komam and Rantau Layung villages in Batu Sopang sub-district, Paser District, and villages in Tanjung Harapan, located in the Nunukan District of East Kalimantan (Fig.2.1). To determine the extent and activities of traditional forest management of ironwood, every village was included in the inventory.
The first sites were chosen in order to investigate traditional ironwood management in highly pressured forest areas. The villages of Muluy and Rantau Layung are adjacent to the former logging concession of the P.T. Telaga Mas company, which has been taken over by a new company, P.T. Rizky Kacieda Riana. The villages of Muluy and Rantau Layung are located northwest of Balikpapan and the provincial capital of Samarinda in a zone with growing population pressures and expanding market access. The area has undergone extensive felling in the past. In the 1980s, many of the logged-over concession lands were reclassified for use as estate crop plantations, transmigration sites and coal mines. Families residing in these villages sense that they are increasingly squeezed between these competing, often conflicting land-use activities.
The second research site selected is the traditional community of Tanjung Harapan, Nunukan District, located on the north of East Kalimantan. In order to examine ironwood cultivation by indigenous peoples, fieldwork was conducted in two villages in Sembakung sub-district - Desa Pagaluyon and Saduman. The study took place in June and July 2006 and in February 2007. Communities of Agabag Dayaks have settled in this area over the past several hundred years. The lives of these communities had changed little until the last twenty years, when logging concessions initiated operations on their traditional lands.
These villages have abundant natural resources, but these are deteriorating due to over-exploitation of the land for plantations and logging activities, as well as due to other causes like forest fire and drought. These villages were specifically selected because of the external pressures they experience, which, typically, have a serious impact on traditional practices of local forest management. At the same time, traditional practices are able to being maintained to some extent.
In addition, another research site was necessary in order to obtain information about the sources of rough sawn ironwood (in the form of square blocks) flowing from various remote upriver areas in a number of districts in East Kalimantan. For this purpose, districts such as Kutai (East Kutai and Kutai Kartanegara, and West Kutai) and Paser, which are close to the harbour cities of Samarinda and Balikpapan, were selected.
Accessible villages in these districts and cities were sampled in order to complete a trade and market analysis. Interviews and market surveys were largely conducted between 2005 and 2007 in Balikpapan and Samarinda and in Sebulu sub-district (Kutai Kartanegara District), as well as in the districts of Penajam North Paser and Paser, where sawmills and industries were visited during this period. Sebulu sub-district was chosen as a research site, both as a source of ironwood - clear-cutting and forest conversion - and for information regarding primary ironwood processing (undertaken at Sumber Sari and Sebulu Modern villages, as well as at Sawit Jaya village in Paser District). The municipalities of Balikpapan and Samarinda were selected in order to obtain information on secondary ironwood processing. Trade and distribution activities from source centres to processing centres were traced in order to gain information on trade practices.
2.3.2. Preparation
During preliminary field visits in 2004, initial field data was collected mainly in Muluy and Rantau Layung. Before research in these villages was undertaken, however, informal meetings were held with the traditional leader (the Kepala Adat Besar, Pak Debang) in Long Kali and with a local NGO - PEMA Paser, both of whom assisted me in conducting my research. The assistance of local adat leaders was considered to be important because of constraints regarding the local language, which sometimes posed problems in terms of clearly explaining the research goals. With PEMA’s assistance, a formal agreement was
made with villagers and, in particular, with the traditional adat chiefs (Kepala Adat) in a number of villages, who were approached for permission to conduct research in their forests and village areas.
As part of my preparation I also visited the Provincial (Samarinda) and District Forest Services in Paser, Nunukan, Kutai Kartanegara, East Kutai and Balikpapan to discuss the theme of the research with the heads of these offices and to interview the staff about, in particular, the current situation of ironwood timber trade and the planning of ironwood cultivation efforts in respect of the national programme, GN-RHL (Gerakan Nasional-Rehabilitasi Hutan dan Lahan) in East Kalimantan.
2.3.3. Paser District
Paser is one of ten districts (and four cities) in the province of East Kalimantan. It is located in the southern corner of the province and is 120 km to the southwest of Balikpapan Bay. This most southern district of East Kalimantan is located geographically between 0°45’18,37’’ – 2°27’20,82” south latitude and 115°36’14,5” – 166° 57’35,03”
east longitude. Paser officially came into existence as a district, in 2002, following the partition of the former Paser District into two more modestly-sized districts (see table 2.1 below). Prior to its partition, the original district of Paser covered approximately 14,937 km2 or 7 per cent of the province’s total land area. Administratively, Paser District is organised into ten sub-districts or kecamatans: Long Kali, Long Ikis, Kuaro, Paser Balengkong, Batu Sopang, Tanjung Harapan, Muara Samu, Tanah Grogot, Batu Engau, and Muara Komam (Statistics for Paser District 2009, www.paserkab.go.id).
The term Paser is sometimes mistaken for the term Pasir. Paser is related to the ethnicity of a sub-group of Dayak’s in the region of the Gunung Lumut, while Pasir refers to the district name or government administration. In fact, these two terms are sometimes confused by the people in this region. In response to the euphoria of autonomy, the government of Paser changed the name of district from Kabupaten Pasir to Kabupaten Paser in August 2007.
The population census taken in the middle of 2010 records the total population of this district as 231,593 people, over a quarter of whom are concentrated in and around the town of Tanah Grogot, the district’s administrative centre and the capital (Statistics for East Kalimantan Province 2010, www.kaltim.bps.go.id). This population inhabits ten sub-districts and 125 villages. The population of Paser mainly comprises the Paser indigenous group, Banjar, Bugis (from South Sulawesi), and migrants (spontaneous as well as those from the government’s transmigrant programme) from Java, South Sulawesi, and West Nusa Tenggara. The main sources of income of the people in the Paser district are derived from agriculture and oil palm plantations, forest products, coal mining, fisheries, and subsistence agriculture systems.
Table 2.1 Land area and population of new district in post-partition Paser Districts Land Area (km2) Population
Paser 11,603.94 231.593
Penajam North Paser 3,333.06 142,693
Total 14,937.00 374,286
Source: Statistics for Paser District 2009, www.paserkab.go.id and Statistics for East Kalimantan Province 2010, www.kaltim.bps.go.id.
The Paser people are composed of a number of groups who occupy large parts of the southern part of the province of East Kalimantan. Most inhabitants are ethnically Orang Paser who have recently shifted their cultural focus from the nearby Dayak communities to the ethnically diverse coastal areas, characterized by their Islamic and Malay identities. The Paser Dayak are officially recognised as one of the indigenous ethnic groups of Indonesia.
Paser District comprises a flat coastal plain and a mountainous, forested hinterland called Gunung Lumut. The Gunung Lumut Protected Forest areas (35,350 ha) is one of five protected forests found in Paser District. The forest conservation area of the Gunung Lumut Protected Forest has been declared a protected forest by the Government of Indonesia, through a Decree of the Minister of Agriculture (SK Menteri Pertanian) No.
24/Kpts/Um/I/1983 and the Forestry Minister Decree No. 321/Kpts/UM/I/1983) (see also Chapter 4). Table 2.2 provides an overview of the total forest area based on its functions in the Paser District. The table shows that protected forest in Paser District amounts to only 19.07 per cent of the total forest area. This is contrast to the allocation for production forest (limited and permanent), which accounts for more than half of the total forest area in Paser District (about 65.30 per cent).
Table 2.2 Forest area and functions in Paser District
Forest Function Area size (ha) Percentage (%)
Protected forest 136,191 19.07
Conservation forest 111,616 15.63
Limited production forest 180,435 25.27 Permanent production forest 285,799 40.03
Total 714,041 100
Source: Statistics for Paser District 2009, www.paserkab.go.id.
In contrast to much of East Kalimantan, which has been heavily logged since the early-1970s, Paser still has extensive forest resources in good to reasonable condition, with 61 percent of the district’s land area officially classified as Forest Estate (Kawasan Hutan) (Statistics for Paser District 2009, www.paserkab.go.id). Indeed, Paser is East Kalimantan’s oldest district in term of establishing large-scale commercial crop plantations as an economic answer to the decreasing forest resources. Given the biophysical conditions (especially soils and topography) of the province and the characteristics of timber exploitation, policy-makers argue that commercial crop plantations are a realistic option for this area. The expansion of plantations began in the early 1980s and by 2004 they had covered approximately 74,000 hectares, mostly on converted production forests. Under the Regional Land Use Planning System (RTRW = Rencana Tata Ruang Wilayah) or the district spatial mapping classification, crop plantations are classified as non-forested areas. The main commodity of these estates is oil palm, while others produce rubber, hybrid coconut, coffee, pepper, and cocoa trees. Since regional autonomy (2001), all administration concerning commercial crop plantations has been under control of the local government of Paser District (Bachriadi & Sardjono 2005).
The plantations have been distributed across the sub-districts, but the larger- scale ones are found in only five sub-districts; namely, Long Ikis (23,553 ha), Paser Balengkong (12,071 ha), Long Kali (11,522 ha), Kuaro (10,296 ha), and Muara Engau (9,400 ha). Meanwhile, the Smallholder Estate (or Perkebunan Rakyat) dominates the models and schemes developed by the local government. At the end of 2004, there were more than 17,000 families (about 58,000 to 85,000 people) whose lives were dependent on estate schemes (Bachriadi & Sardjono 2005).
As mentioned previously, to gain a more detailed study, I focused on two villages in Paser District - Muluy and Rantau Layung (see Chapter 3 and 4). A supplementary inventory of natural ironwood was also conducted in these villages.
2.3.4. Nunukan District
Nunukan District is located in the most northeastern part of East Kalimantan province.
It covers approximately 14,264 km2 and lies between 3° 15’00” – 4° 24’55” east latitude and 115° 33’30” – 118° 30’54” north longitude. This district was formed in 1999 when the large Bulungan District was split and sub-divided into five kecamatans. In 2008, Nunukan District itself was divided into nine sub-districts: Krayan, South Krayan, Lumbis, Sebuku, Sembakung, Nunukan, South Nunukan, Sebatik and West Sebatik.
The sub-district of Nunukan is the district capital and also the name of an island located in the multi-ethnic coastal zone within the district. It has a surface area of 1,596.77 km2 or 11.19 per cent of the total area of the district. Nunukan is a long and narrow district stretching from the Sulawesi Sea in the east to deep into the central Borneo Mountains in the west. It borders the districts of Malinau and Bulungan to the south,
and Malaysia’s Sabah and Sarawak to the north and west. This district also neighbours Malaysia’s Tawau city (Statistics for Nunukan District 2010). Its regional position, in the borderlands of Indonesia and – Malaysia, makes Nunukan District an important strategic area for inter-state traffic. It has 17 islands and ten rivers. The longest river is the Sembakung River at about 278 km; the shortest is the Tabur River, which is about 30 km long.
Based on the population census of mid 2010, the population of Nunukan is 140,842 people, who inhabit nine sub-districts and 227 villages, and there is an annual population growth of 3.24 per cent (Statistics for East Kalimantan Province 2010, www.kaltim.bps.go.id and Statistics for Nunukan District 2010). In 2009, the mean population density in the district was 9.29 people per km2; this is substantially below the average for East Kalimantan of 18 people per km2. Compared to 2008, the population has grown with 2.7 per cent. Of the nine sub-districts, Sebatik is the most populated with 206.95 people per km2. This is followed by West Sebatik sub-district which has 81.18 people per km2. Meanwhile the other sub-districts range from 1.35–59.80 people per km2 (Statistics for Nunukan District 2010).
Like Paser, Nunukan has a diverse population. The majority of its population along the coast are migrants, mainly from Bugis, Java and Toraja, However, nearly all of Indonesia’s major ethnic groups appear to be represented. Coastal Dayak groups, indigenous to the area, have adapted to ‘Melayu’ culture. Moving inland, one encounters villages populated by a mixed Dayak and migrant population. A number of these Dayak have converted to Islam, while others have not.
The Nunukan District is largely comprised of the Sembakung and Sebuku river basins (with an ‘upland’ and ‘lowland/coastal’ sub-district Lumbis-Sembakung and Sebuku-Nunukan, respectively). It has a different dynamic of forest cover change.
Although forest conversion has not been extensive in the Nunukan District (it is limited to transmigration areas), there are proposals for forests to be converted for plantations (primarily oil palm), agriculture, shrimp ponds (coastal mangrove) or mining. An overview of the total forest area based on its functions in the Nunukan District is shown in table 2.3. The table shows that protected forest in Nunukan District amounts to only 17.07 per cent of the total forest area. This is in contrast to the allocation for production forest, which accounts for more than half of the total forest area in Nunukan District (about 46.40 per cent).
Table 2.3 Forest area and different functions in Nunukan District
Forest Function Area size (ha) Percentage (%)
Protected forest 164,593 17.07
Conservation forest 352,154 36.53
Production forest 447,264 46.40
Total 964,011 100
Source: Statistics for Nunukan District 2010.
In order to study the cultivation and conservation efforts of ironwood by indigenous peoples, research areas were selected where villagers have traditional cultivation knowledge. For a more detailed study of cultivation and conservation efforts of ironwood I focused on two villages along the Sembakung river basin; namely, Pagaluyon and Saduman villages (Chapter 5).
2.3.5. Kutai Kartanegara District
Kutai Kartanegara District (abbrev. Kukar) is one of the newly formed districts in East Kalimantan. It lies between 1°28’21” north latitude – 1°08’06” south latitude and 115°26’28” – 117°36’43” east longitude and covers approximately 27,263.10 km2 (land) or 12.89 per cent of the province’s total land area and has a water area of 4,097 km2. Kukar District was officially established in November 1999, in accordance with Law No. 47/1999, which outlined the division of the original district of Kutai into three districts: Kutai Barat (West Kutai), Kutai Timur (East Kutai) and Kutai Kartanegara.
Before Kutai was divided, it had been the largest district in East Kalimantan, covering 94,629 km2, or approximately 46 per cent of the province’s total land area (RPJM Kutai Kartanegara district 2005-2010, www.bappeda.kutaikartanegarakab.go.id).
Based on the population census taken in the middle of 2010, the population of Kutai Kartanegara District is 626,286 people with an annual population growth of 2.85 per cent. Inhabitants live in 18 sub-districts and 226 villages. The mean population density in the district is 20 people per km2, which is substantially below the average for East Kalimantan of 18 people per km2 (Statistics for East Kalimantan Province 2010, www.kaltim.bps.go.id). The district is comprised of indigenous peoples (Kutai, Benuaq, Tunjung, Bahau, Modang, Kenyah, Punan and Kayan) and migrants from Java, Bugis (South Sulawesi), Madura, Buton, Timor, etc.
At the heart of Kukar is Tenggarong, the capital city of this district. The city is located beside the Mahakam River, 45 km northwest of Samarinda. The Mahakam River is a main artery for local transportation. This has resulted many settlement locations
an interesting history. It was the capital of the oldest Hindu kingdom in Indonesia, the Kutai kingdom, which was ruled by the famous king, Mulawarman. The Tenggarong Kutai language is a branch of the Melayu (Malay) language cluster. Kutai also had a long history as an administrative unit, having originated from the Kutai sultanate established late in the fifteenth century along the Mahakam River (Magenda 1991).
An overview of the total forest area based on its functions in Kutai Kartanegara district is shown in table 2.4. The table shows that protected forest in Kutai Kartanegara district is only about 14.55 per cent of the total forest area. This is in contrast to the allocation for production forest, which accounts for more than half of the total forest area in Kutai Kartanegara District (about 80.41 per cent).
Table 2.4 Forest area and different functions in Kutai Kartanegara district
Forest Function Area size (ha) Percentage (%)
Protected forest 239,816 14.55
Conservation forest 82,983 5.04
Limited production forest 806,128 48.91
Permanent production forest 519,070 31.50
Total 1,647,997 100
Source: RPJM Kutai Kartanegara district 2005-2010, www.bappeda.kutaikartanegarakab.go.id.
Potter (1996) estimates that around 40 per cent of Indonesia’s log production originated from East Kalimantan during the period 1970-79. A large proportion of this timber came from the area now known as Kutai Kartanegara, just west of Kutai Barat, where the largest stands of commercial species, such as meranti (Shorea sp.), keruing (Dipterocarpaceae family) and dammar (Agathis sp.), could be found. The Mahakam River also provided a well-developed transport system.
Before Kutai was divided into three districts, the Provincial Forestry Service office or Cabang Dinas Kehutanan (CDK) was located in the upper Mahakam River or Mahakam Ulu and monitored forest activities and production in the area now known as Kutai Barat. The size of forest area monitored by this agency has remained more or less the same since the partition of Kutai. According to the agency’s statistics, the upper Mahakam area produced approximately 3 million m3 of logs during the period 1994-98. This made the area the fourth largest producer of logs within the province after Mahakam Tengah (now known as Kutai Kartanegara - 7.3 million m3), Berau (3.9 million m3) and Bulungan Utara (3.6 million m3). According to official statistics, log production in the Mahakam Ulu area gradually declined between 1995 and 2000 from 818,324 m3 in 1994/95 to 619,426 m3 in 1998/99 (Kalimantan Timur 1999).
However, many people suspect that there had been an increase in illegal logging in the area during the same period (source: interviews with various NGOs based in Samarinda and staff at the district forestry office in Tenggarong, Kutai Kartanegara, November 2007). Therefore, official statistics were likely to understate real timber production from the area. Growing volumes of timber are expected to emerge from the Kutai Barat area in the near future because much of Kutai Kartanegara has already been logged and was badly affected by the 1997-98 forest fires (Hoffmann et al. 1999).
To produce a more detailed discussion of the chain of production to consumption of ironwood products, and to examine the flow of ironwood raw material from different status forest to finishing industries, two harbor towns - Samarinda and Balikpapan were selected for study (see Chapter 5). The research sites in the Kutai Kartanegara District have a fairly good road infrastructure and are accessible by car or boat.
2.4. The forest
East Kalimantan province has a total forest area of 14,651,553 hectares, which is about 73.83 per cent of East Kalimantan’s total land area. These forests consist of four types of forest classifications: protected forest, natural conservation and recreational forest (including educational/training forest), limited production forest and permanent production forest (Statistics for Forest Area Establishment 2009). An overview of the total forest area based on its functions (the Decree of the Minister of Forestry no.79/
Kpts-II/2001 on the Designation of Forest Area and Marine Ecosystem) in East Kalimantan is shown in table 2.5.
Table 2.5 Forest area and different functions in East Kalimantan
Forest Function Area size (ha) Percentage (%)
Protected forest 2,751,702 18.78
Conservation forest 2,165,198 14.78
Limited production forest 4,612,965 31.48
Permanent production forest 5,121,688 34.96
Total 14,651,553 100
Source: Statistics for Forest Area Establishment Centre Region IV Samarinda 2009.
The table shows that protected forest in East Kalimantan is only about 18.78 per cent of the total forest area. This is in contrast to the allocation for production forest (limited and permanent), which accounts for more than half of the total forest area in East Kalimantan (about 66.44 per cent). The remaining protected forests and conservation forest areas are under pressure from different interests groups, land encroachments and
Tropical forests in this region are well known for their high biodiversity and range from lowland to mountainse, with additional areas of peat swamp and mangrove forests.
The forests of East Kalimantan contain more than 800 tree species listed as threatened on the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Global Red List, alongside several endangered animal species, such as orangutans, proboscis monkeys, sun bears and gibbons (The Nature Conservancy 2006). These forests also have a high economic value due to the commercially valuable plants that grow there, such as timber trees, lime trees (Tilia spp.), bangkirai or yellow balau trees (Dipterocarpaceae sp.), nyatoh trees (Palaquium spp.), ironwood or ulin trees (very hard wood), mangrove trees (Rhizophoraceae) and perupuk trees (Lophopetalum javanicum). In addition, many non- timber commodities are harvested from the forests, such as resin, honey, orchid flowers, crocodile leather, birds’ nests, agar-wood from gaharu trees (Aquilaria mallacensis), illipe nuts from tengkawang trees (Dipterocarpaceae sp.), tunjuk langit roots (Helminthostachys) and roof shingle made from ironwood timber.
From my literature review I can conclude that forest destruction in the region is mainly due to the rampant exploitation of forests and its unbridled clearance by thoughtless perpetrators, as well as illegal logging and natural factors such as forest fires. Today, vast areas of primary rainforest in East Kalimantan are being lost through exploitation, large-scale fires and conversion to agriculture. Consequently, degraded vegetation types and secondary forests are replacing patches of species-rich lowland rainforest.
2.5. Characteristics of forestry 2.5.1. Commercial forestry
In the early 1970s over 50 per cent of the province (9-8 million ha) was leased to concessionaires. In fact, over one hundred concessionaires are currently operating in the province and producing timber (World Bank 1989). Today, the province of East Kalimantan is the centre of the commercial timber industry, supplying nearly 25 per cent of the nation’s commercial needs, or approximately 6.5 million logs per annum (Statistics for East Kalimantan Province 2010, www.kaltim.bps.go.id). East Kalimantan’s forest-based industries make a significant contribution to the national economy, though long-term sustainability hinges on a considerable increase in the supply of timber and fibre. This cannot come from the sustainable management of natural forests. Rather, it needs to come from a variety of plantation systems, which could be developed on existing degraded forest land.
At the end of 1980, the government implemented a national forestry policy (approved nearly a decade earlier), requiring villagers and other interested parties to obtain permits to harvest non-timber forest products and some timbers, including ironwood (Peluso
1992). This policy, which established formal, state-controlled cooperatives (KUD:
Koperasi Unit Desa), was designed to formalize, and thus to protect, the rights of forest- dependent communities to harvest and sell commercial forest products state-controlled cooperatives (KUD: Koperasi Unit Desa) (Peluso 1983).
Indonesia’s decentralisation and regional autonomy processes have placed considerable pressures on fledgling district governments of East Kalimantan, which must now generate new investment in the region and secure a substantially larger portion of their revenues from local sources (Barr et.al 2001). With the introduction of the 1999 Forestry Law in Indonesia, there has been a flurry of activities in East Kalimantan by parties trying to take advantage of the gradual decentralisation of the use and management of forest resources in the area (Casson & Obidzinski 2002).
Since early 2000, the district administrations of East Kalimantan have taken significant steps in both directions by issuing numerous small-scale forest conversion permits, known as IPPK - Ijin Pemungutan dan Pemanfaatan Kayu or timber extraction and utilisation permit) (Barr et al. 2001). The ability to grant 100 ha concessions at the district (kabupaten) level (known by the acronym HPHH - Hak Pemungutan Hasil Hutan or forest product harvest concessions and IPPK) and up to 100,000 ha at the provincial level has been a real magnet for various timber entrepreneurs. According to Barr et.al.(2001), these permits are ostensibly designed to provide royalties to the district government, as well as a range of benefits, including in-kind contributions, volume-based fees and employment, to the communities.
As part of a longer-term strategy, districts governments are actively seeking to develop roads and other forms of physical infrastructure in order to attract further investment in the forestry, plantation and mining sectors. The recent suspension of the law that served as the basis for regional authorities issuing permits for small concessions has had a limited effect on reducing the total area allocated for logging and/or conversion purposes. The production forests hold the key to regional development. At the end of 2009, the existing production forests in East Kalimantan province were being managed by 84 Forest Management Concessions (HPH) with a total area of 6,146,319 ha and by 39 Industrial Plantation Forests (HTI), with a total area of 1,585,678 ha (Statistics for East Kalimantan Province 2010, www.kaltim.bps.go.id). In many districts of this province, it is clear that intensive timber exploitation in the last decade has resulted in the degradation of large areas of land and unproductive forest in the districts (Statistics for Forest Area Establishment Centre Region IV Samarinda 2009).
2.5.2. Laws and regulations for ironwood and its management in Kalimantan
Commercial logging in most of Kalimantan’s production forests follows the
Dipterocarpaceae) and certain size (≥ 50 cm diameter at breast height or DBH). Most of the species of Dipterocarpaceae are needed as raw material for plywood and sawmill timber industries. Ironwood, the hardest, most dense tropical hardwood, is not suitable for these industries. Foresters typically consider ironwood as a ‘people’s species’ because of its use in village subsistence systems. The Indonesian government regards ironwood as a species requiring special protection. It restricts cutting to trees of over 60 cm DBH (via a ministerial decree or Surat Keputusan Nr. 54/Kpts/Um/2/1972). Furthermore, timber companies or concession holders are not allowed or licenced to cut and trade ironwood.
The cutting of ironwood by concessionaires requires special permission or permit from the Governor, based on the Governor’s Decree (Surat Keputusan) of the province of East Kalimantan Nr. 43/Th-Ek/1969 issued on 3 April 1969. Indonesian law forbids the export of ironwood. The legislation is unclear and enforcement by both the Forest Service and official timber companies and holders of concession areas is weak and lacking. However, enforcement is constrained by the fact that Indonesia’s Department of Forestry in Indonesia has a budget of less than $1/ha and staffing levels of less than 1 employee per 70,000 ha (Rice et al. 1997).
In Kalimantan, forest management is dominated by industrial timber extraction.
Forest products are a lucrative source of income, even at the national economy level.
Consequently, these products were targets for many interest groups during the New Order government. Indeed, the government gave timber companies the rights to control all forest activities within their concession areas, but companies have little incentive or capacity to manage the activities of numerous villages within their concession territories (Peluso 1992).
HPHH or forest product harvest concessions provided for three kinds of minor product concessions and different sorts of forest harvesting rights, including rights to collect non-timber forest products such as rattan, resin and birds’ nests; the rights to harvest wood in areas up to 100 ha for village needs (including the rights to sell the wood harvested in these areas); and the rights to collect dead wood in the forest (for fuel wood). Ironwood fell under the second of these categories. Until the late 1980s, the government formally required villagers wishing to cut ironwood to submit a logging plan for up to 100 ha at a time (Peluso 1992). Proposals and plans for HPHH were to be submitted to the provincial forestry office by village cooperatives. The permit system also allowed the Forest Service to collect revenues on the kinds of forest products that were the most difficult to tax: those harvested by thousands of individuals and groups working in isolated or remote areas of the forest. Any forest products cut for sale had to be sold to specific traders who also held permits. From these permits on the sale of forest products, the foresters derived their taxes.
According to Peluso (1992), even under this regulation, the local subsistence harvest of ironwood was only allowed in forests that were not protection forests, or in production forests for which logging concessions had not yet been assigned. Therefore, the regulation
could not legally be applied in the majority of Kalimantan forests. Moreover, because no formal recognition of village forms of resource allocation in the case of ironwood was granted by the government, the tree remained open to exploitation.
Since 1987, both commercial and subsistence uses of ironwood have exploded (Peluso 1992). As government and logging roads penetrate further into provincial Kalimantan, the local markets have ballooned. Chainsaws have accelerated the exploitation of forests; however, they have also made it possible to use different types of wood for local construction. The villagers discarded many timbers as unsuitable for boards or posts because the wood could not be cut with axes - the fibres were not straight and the boards would crack. Fibre structure is not a problem when these species are cut with a chainsaw. Unfortunately, the quality of the new timbers being used in house construction is inferior to that of ironwood and other tree barks that previously dominated longhouse construction in Borneo. Villagers call most Dipterocarp species
‘class-two wood’. In practical terms, this means that within a decade or two, walls and other parts of houses will need to be replaced. When it is available, ironwood is still used for foundations and house frames, as well as for roof tiles, but there will soon be no mature ironwood trees in the forest for new home builders to use in construction.
The other provision on the HPHH was territorial and related to the dominant use of the forest for which a permit was sought. Permits were valid only in forest areas that were not protection forests, nature reserves, or recreation forests; they were allowed in production and some conversion forests (Peluso 1992). Permits for non-timber products were also issued for areas where a timber concession (HPH) was simultaneously valid;
the only condition was that collections should not take place in a particular site while logging activities were going on. Permits on wood, however, were allowed only in those production forests where no HPH had been issued. And therein lay a key contradiction:
very little if any production forest area in East Kalimantan had not been leased for logging, meaning few HPHH for wood were possible. Nevertheless, the ironwood trade has flourished.
No national-level forest policy for the controlled harvest of ironwood could be effectively enforced until 1999. The ironwood problem also illustrates the breakdown of the local ethics of access to a nonrenewable forest product, and the social processes underlying the recent rapid decline in local stocks. In essence, ironwood stocks are threatened by the competition between forest management philosophies and systems operating in Kalimantan (Peluso 1992). Both government and local people purport to manage ironwood within claimed territories, by restricting access to and cutting of the timber.
2.6. Research methods
The field activities were conducted between 2005 and 2007. The first visits took place in early August and September 2005 and the final visits were made in March 2007. Three data collection techniques were used:
2.6.1. Inventory of ironwood Natural ironwood stands
A purposive sampling method was used to produce an inventory of the natural ironwood stand in the customary forests around the villages of Muluy and Rantau Layung in Paser District, where local people manage the natural ironwood stands. Sampling plots were established in four belt transects (total area of plots 200 m x 100 m = 2 ha) in an area of a maximum of 20 km around each village studied. Stratified sampling of trees, saplings and seedlings was used. The size of a sample plot was 20 m x 20 m for trees, 10 m x 10 m for poles, 5 m x 5 m for saplings and 2 m x 2 m for seedling observation in the same transects. A plot of 20 x 20 m was formed on one side of an imaginary line starting at a random first point. This plot was formed in order to count the number of species of trees with a DBH of 130 cm above ground level or, if buttresses were present, 30 cm above buttresses. The trees were recorded and measured using the circumference method. Inside each 20 x 20 m plot, a plot of 10x10 m was formed overlapping with the first plot in order to count the species of trees with a DBH of 10 to 24 cm (poles).
In addition, inside each 10 x 10 m plot, a further 5 x 5 m plot was formed to count any saplings present.
The materials used to measure the forest stand (samples of trees and seedlings) were:
compass, GPS 60 Garmin (Geographical Positioning System), camera (Sony cyber-shot), rope, stationery material and boxes for collecting plant specimens. All ironwood trees in the plots were tagged and measured for size (DBH, height). In addition, information regarding topographic features, soil conditions, and a general description of the changes in habitat along transects was collected.
As Dove (1988), Padoch and Peter (1993), and Peluso (1993) suggest, sustainable forest management is a way to maintain and provide biodiversity, as well as to generate diverse and continuous sources of income. To assess whether the Paser Dayak natural resource management system is sustainable, the plant biodiversity richness inside the plots was measured. All the plant and tree species found inside the plot were identified and counted. Species richness inside the plots was measured along the vegetation transects. I randomly selected one GPS point in order to start drawing an imaginary transect line in the field. The ethno-botanical records were made with the help of four key people who provided information on the uses of plants and their local names.
The research in the plots was further supported by general botanical collections at
the research sites. Each variety of species was noted. The varieties of all species were recognised by the local people and verified using the List of Tree Species Based on Vernacular and Botanical Name (Anonymous, 1983) and checked by a botanist from the Herbarium at Wanariset Samboja, East Kalimantan. Data were analysed in SPSS 12 in all combinations of independent and dependent variables. The database consists of plot data: all parameters measured at the forest level: forest type, altitude, slope, etc.
Data analysis
Species Importance Value index (SIV) and Family Importance Value (FIV) were calculated using the following equations according to Curtis and McIntosh (1950, 1951) and Mori et al. (1983), respectively.
Relative frequency
Relative density
sample 100 the
of s individual of
Number
species a
of s individual of
Number
Χ
=
Relative dominance
sample 100 the
of area basal Total
species a
of area Basal
Χ
=
SIV = Relative frequency + Relative density + Relative dominance Relative diversity
sample 100 the
of species of
number Total
family a
of species of
Number
Χ
=
Relative density
sample 100 the
of s individual of
number Total
family a of s individual of
Number
Χ
=
species 100 all
for units Sample
species a
containing units
sample of
Number
Χ
=
Relative dominance
sample 100 the
of area basal Total
family a
of area Basal
Χ
=
FIV = Relative diversity + Relative density + Relative dominance
To obtain similarity between communities of each ironwood variety based on species composition, the Sørensen coefficient index is used. The formula is as follows (Sørensen, 1948):
Sorensen coefficient =
Where: C: the number of shared species by two communities A: the species of community 1
B: the species of community 2
2.6.2. Traditional forest management of ironwood and sustainable utilisation strategies
Structured interviews on the presence and activities of traditional forest management of ironwood were conducted with 61 households in the selected villages. In all cases, at least one of the informants was a local government official or traditional (adat) authority figure and was expected to have detailed knowledge of village related issues. In addition, household interviews and/or in-depth case studies were carried out in the villages in order add depth to the inventory data.
Characteristics of traditional management
The basic instruments used to collect the data on traditional management of ironwood were structured and semi-structured questionnaires, observation and group discussion.
A semi-structured interview (SSI) is a Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) method that engages villagers in a relevant conversation through a series of guided questions (not a structured questionnaire) (Chambers 1992). In order to gather information about traditional knowledge of ironwood, I interviewed 61 households of Paser indigenous people. In addition to one-to-one and open-ended interviews, further information was collected in group discussions, which facilitated more interactive communication. The
2 x C A + B
interviews were generally conducted in Bahasa Indonesia, although some Paser words were used.
Important information is generated by talking with villagers about the characteristics of traditional management of ironwood. SSI can be used with individuals, key informants, interest groups or other small groups of villagers (i.e. women’s groups). The use of a questionnaire complements and supports direct observation of local peoples activities related to traditional management of ironwood.
The questionnaire was prepared in order to investigate the local knowledge of traditional management of ironwood (see Appendix 9). It was designed and pre-tested in a number of villages in the study area. The questionnaire was composed of questions about background variables regarding the respondent and the villages. In addition, a number of open and multiple choice questions about people’s perception and resources use were included. Those questions relating to natural resources use and traditional management of ironwood were open questions, the answer to which were then categorised. This ensured that respondents were not limited in their range of possible answers.
The households surveyed were randomly selected in each of the two villages. This selection was made by using a sketch map of the village and by employing a random table. In each village approximately 50 per cent of households were surveyed. Interview sessions were scheduled in the afternoon after the villagers had returned from working in their cultivated fields. Whenever possible, group interviews were conducted, with all adult members of the household present. For the most part, both men and women gave equal responses, although one gender may have been more informed about certain information. Those interviewed were generally interested in the survey and answered the questions to the best of their ability. Information was obtained through both formalised and structured interviews and through more unstructured interviews and conversations.
A great deal of information was recorded during walks or during the rest periods when undertaking the inventory.
2.6.3. Traditional knowledge of cultivation and conservation efforts for ironwood
Ironwood planted
Two data collection techniques were used. First, the basic instruments used to collect the data on traditional management of ironwood were structured and semi-structured questionnaires, observation and group discussion. Research, including participant observation among local people and farmers, and interviews with key informants was conducted among the Dayak Agabag peoples in the Sembakung sub-district of the
systems, people’s perception of the utilisation of ironwood and species characteristics, local methods for locating such trees, people’s explanations of tree planting, traditional cultivation techniques, the practice of shifting cultivation, social organisations and norms, etc. was collected through semi-structured-interviews (SSI) with key informants (KI). The KI included village headmen, leaders of organisations, school principals, adat (customary law) leaders, elders, swidden cultivators and other knowledgeable people.
To gather information about traditional knowledge regarding the cultivation of ironwood, 30 households of Dayak Agabag indigenous people in two villages (Saduman and Pagaluyon) were interviewed. In addition to these one-to-one and open-ended interviews, further information was collected during group discussions, which facilitated more interactive communication. A survey and interviews with household representatives mostly men were also conducted. When available, other members of the households were involved in the interviews. The main aim of the survey was to collect data on forest use, farm size, levels of labour and production, etc. Interviews were conducted with 46 households and a group interview, attended by 34 people both men and women, young and old was also undertaken in order to collect views about problems relating to natural resource management and the future of their village. Participants were observed in order to develop a ‘feeling’ about the village and to assess social relations within the community.
Second, in order to gather data about the plantation distribution of ironwood, I conducted inventories in plots of ironwood trees in agroforestry fields at different locations in both villages in Sembakung sub-district: Saduman and Pagaluyon.
Sampling was undertaken in plots in customary forest around the villages where local people manage and plant ironwood in their forest land. The inventory was conducted in agroforestry land or swidden land owned by farmers. These swidden are mixed stands of ironwood trees, coffee, banana, cocoa and durian.
Beyond the standard data collection techniques. i.e. informal and semi-structured interviews with farmers, active participant observation of ironwood cultivation proved to be the most fruitful means for acquiring traditional knowledge about ironwood species and cultivation practices. This type of knowledge was seldom elicited outside the context of actual cultivation; only through participation and learning by doing could a deeper understanding be gained of how this rare tree is found and the traditional methods used to cultivate ironwood.
2.6.4. Production to consumption chain; trade and market survey Production to consumption chain
This part of the research focused on target groups directly involved in the ironwood chain - from production to consumption: woodcutters, collectors, traders, industries and consumers. Informants in the system such as chainsawmen, processors of various products, loaders and drivers are also covered in this study. Interviews facilitated the investigation of trade, supply chain and market analysis, attitudes of timber processors, consumers, institutional arrangements for market facilitation, market development and the use of ironwood timbers based on various products by local people.
Data collection was carried out over a period of two months (November and December) every year from 2005 to 2007 during visits to sawmills and industries.
Both primary and secondary data were collected from many institutions, including the Forest Service (provincial and district), industry and trade offices. Often, the only way to obtain information about timber markets is to carry out surveys of people in the timber supply chain, either by probability sampling or by contacting key informants.
Qualitative information gathered from interviews with key stakeholders provides some verification of any general trends observed in the data. Data collected from the field were compiled, sorted and tabulated.
Table 2.6 Respondents interviewed to gather information on production and consumption in East Kalimantan in 2005-2007.
Topic Method Place Department Number of
interviews per department Production to
consumption chain
Legislation
Semi- structured interviews
Samarinda city (provincial capital);
Balikpapan (Municipality);
Kutai Kertanegara (District capital);
(sub-district offices)
Dept. Forestry Provincial District
Processing Company Sawmills
Dept. Transport Law Bureau Environment Bureau Police
Navy Total
42 33 8 41
13 2 31
Limitations
Given the limited time available to conduct the study, my research focus centred on:
− Natural forests: ironwood timber demand is currently met from natural forests;
− Ironwood in its commercial context: this study did not look at fuel wood or charcoal, although the latter constitutes the greatest proportion of ironwood consumption.
The size and production volume of the fuel wood and charcoal sector in East Kalimantan is not well known, but, given the pattern observed for the country as a whole, they are probably larger than those for the timber sector (formal and informal).
It is also likely that the wood and charcoal sub-sector employs many more people than the timber sector. There is no direct competition between the timber and the fuel wood and charcoal sectors, as the latter concentrates on different wood species. In addition, the trade transactions recorded by government officials only give a partial overview of the ironwood timber trade, because:
1. There is much local trade in ironwood timber that is never subject to official documentation.
2. In some districts, traders are not sending their duplicate copies of declarations/
figures to the headquarters at the Provincial level93
3. There is a considerable amount of illegal harvesting and trade that has no officially documented.
4. Even when there are official figures on trade transactions, timber volumes are often understated.
5. The most recent figures seem to be better kept and/or administrations find it easier to locate them.
For this reason, all the statistics and estimates listed in this document should be treated with caution; the degree of variation between the various official and unofficial sources is such that the cross-checking of sources always proves difficult.
9 The laxity of reporting indicates many problems that need to be addressed in the future
