17370: Vander-Zaag: RE: 17362: Jay: trees (fwd)

[Bob Corbett <corbetre@webster.edu>]

From: Ray Vander-Zaag <rvanderzaag@cmu.ca>

To add further complexity to the 'tree discussion' on the list:

When I arrived as a development worker in 1985, 'tree-cutting permits',
issued by the VSN, were still in place, but soon disappeared with the
departure of Duvalier.  A national reforestation program (funded by U.S.AID
and implemented by PADF) had a difficult time convincing farmers to plant
trees along the edges of their fields, because farmers feared this would
give either the government or the Americans future rights to their land, or
at least to the trees, and they would be stuck with shaded, less-productive
fields.  In the end, the program was much more successful than expected (by
U.S.AID) because the program kept telling farmers (and most eventually
believed it) that the trees were just like any other crop, and that they
would be able to harvest them for fuel, building poles, charcoal, etc when
they were grown.

In other words, telling peasant to plant trees (or not cut them down)
because this is good for the environment and the future was unsuccessful,
but telling farmers to plant trees because it would be good economically for
them in a few years was successful.

So, I doubt that people in the countryside would welcome any government
strong enough to prohibit tree-harvesting.  The solution can never be
coercion, but as indicated above, creating incentives  so that people want
to do the right thing.  In other words, so that 'doing the right thing' for
the environment, the future, is the same as doing the right thing in terms
of short-term individual interest.

Ray Vander Zaag
Winnipeg