The Dangerous Myth of “Sustainable Logging” in Ancient Rainforests

Rainforest logsAfter a couple decades and billions of dollars invested in “sustainable rainforest management”, the ITTO reports less than 5% of tropical rainforest logging areas meet their limited definition of sustainability. Their questionable methods account little for ecological processes and patterns, instead focusing upon continued wood yields. The ridiculousness of ITTO's position is demonstrated by claims that Malaysian loggers, a global rainforest scourge, have made the “greatest progress in sustainable management”.
Groups such as Greenpeace, WWF and Rainforest Action Network that unquestioningly embrace and promote the dangerous wishful myth that ancient primary rainforests can in any manner be meaningfully protected through “sustainable logging” should by now be totally discredited and ashamed of themselves. And this goes for foundations as well.

The Earth's remaining large ancient forest expanses must be protected and restored as “Global Ecological Reserves”, and the means found to compensate countries for lost logging revenues, if the Earth's climate, biodiversity and ecosystem crises are to be solved. Continued rainforest logging precludes any chance of the Earth and human societies achieving global ecological sustainability, and it must end.
EcoInternet calls not only for a boycott of tropical timbers, but also of the organizations supporting and thus legitimizing the dangerous myth of sustainable logging in ancient rainforests.

You may also like...

8 Responses

  1. Isaac Campos says:

    I agree whole heartedly that there is no such thing as sustainable logging.Whoever is supporting this should think twice before believing that these so called practices will work.

  2. Malcolm Mervyn Page says:

    In my view how can there be such a thing as substainable logging when every tree that is felled destroys young trees as it crashes into the undergrowth, also how much forest is destroyed in getting these trees to the mills. There is a lot more destruction to the undergrowth as well by letting light through the canopy that these trees provide.
    It is about time that the other organizations mentioned took another look at the destruction that substainable logging does to the Ancient Forests!
    Malcolm Page.

  3. ray thorpe says:

    please keep us posted as ways happy to help where possible.

  4. scott webster says:

    are you people fricken nuts or what , those trees are what makes oxygen so we can breath , no trees means no oxygen. that means when your dumb asses get done cutting down all them trees your gonna kill everyone. not just the animals and the endangered species which your breaking an international law by bothering endangered species but your gonna kill your own fricken kids , now wake up jack asses and quit cutting down every fricken tree you see

  5. Dawn Parsons says:

    I am upset at the total disregard man has with the ancient rain forests. Not just the rain forests here, but all over the world. I stand in total agreement…these places need to be protected and nurtured. I'm outraged at the waste incurred and damage done to the trees of this planet! thank you for your site. Please contact me on how I can be of help.

  6. Jamie says:

    Interesting perspective from Gregor at Inspired Protagonist, flying high above the Amazonian rainforest with Greenpeace and seeing the devestation fristhand. Check out the burgeoning Audiocast series at!

  7. chi too says:

    Though there are some truths in your opinions, I beg to differ.
    I was there myself to witness the eco-forestry project and have learnt that if theres one thing we environmentalists tend to do is to romantisize conservation.
    As gung-ho as we are in conserving the environment while sitting comfortably in our armchairs, we have failed to recognize that the local communities have needs.
    It is unfortunate, but local communities want development and we have no right to tell them that you don't need it because it will destroy the forest.
    One may question the 'sustainability' of this practise. Having witnessed how meticulous the selection process for the felling of trees are (10% of clan lands set aside for logging… out of which, probably 2 or 3 trees will be felled in a year, and then they're left aside for regeneration), I believe that the practise is truly sustainable. At least a whole lot more sustainable than allowing commercial logging that clear fell entire areas.
    And to answer Malcolm Page's doubts. The trees are not dragged out to the mill. A mobile collapsible mill is setup where the tree is felled and processed on the spot. Afterwhich, local communities hand carry the processed timber to a collection depot. The cleared area where the tree fell is then reforested.
    How sustainable is this? I let you be the judge.
    But while you think about it, I've seen lives improved and forests conserved. It is easy to want to keep everything if it doesn't affect you (besides creating more oxygen for your breathing pleasures).
    There's the other side of the story. Thank you for doing what you're doing and keep up the good job.

  8. john says:

    stop cutting down trees

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.