SCOUL has circulated lies about Mabira!
Sep 08, 2006
MR Emma Masumbuko’s letter entitled “Mehta explains Mabira sale†published in The Daily Monitor on September 1, was a rather deceptive one. <br>
By Gaster Kiyingi
Mr Emma Masumbuko’s letter entitled “Mehta explains Mabira sale†published in The Daily Monitor on September 1, was a rather deceptive one.
the National Forestry Authority (NFA) would like to clear the wrong impression it cast. The drive by SCOUL to degazette 7,100 hectares off Mabira for them to plant sugarcane has attracted a lot of media attention. In response, the media has given the topic acres of space in print and invaluable space on the airwaves.
SCOUL wants to change the land-use from forestry to sugarcane growing contrary to Uganda’s Forestry Policy Statement No. 1 in which government undertakes to actively protect, maintain and sustainably manage the current permanent forest estate. This provides an entry point for the media to report and allows the public freedom to give their views.
To add to the efforts of journalists that have been to the field and collected substantive information, we had had Uganda’s best known writers like John Nagenda, and Prof. Joe Oloka-Onyango pen down facts of professional tenure. We have also attended public debates where professional and academic papers have been presented. All these activities can not simply be rubbished as political intrigue and propaganda fuelled by opportunists. If what Masumbuko raised in his letter holds water, I challenge him and his employers to organise a public debate and present the “facts†instead of using a kakuyege approach that demeans the integrity of the NFA.
Masumbuko alleges that the public is fed on unresearched information by the media. I would like the public to know that SCOUL has circulated half-baked information that created an impression that what is left of Mabira is a stretch along the Jinja–Kampala highway. They have even at one point published something about there being one tree per 31 square metres.
This can only be laughable because Mabira is a very well stocked forest and one of our best natural forests in the country.
Recent exploratory inventories carried out in Mabira (for both the production and buffer zones) show that there are 167 cubic metres per hectare of merchantable timber trees which is approximately 400 trees in every hectare.
The forest is 100% free of encroachment, its boundaries are well maintained and NFA has undertaken enrichment planting in areas where SCOUL’s own employees had established gardens in the reserve.
Masumbuko alleges that together with one A.S. Rao, they have visited forest management officials and the NFA at Mabira.
Again, we can only laugh at this because NFA’s advice to Government is clear.
Converting Mabira into sugarcane growing will spell an environmental disaster for the central region in particular and this country in general. Whether encroached or not, the current status of Mabira is a Forest Reserve and not simply a forest. It is a home for trees (for timber and non-timber products) and other forms of life both flora and fauna.
Therefore, the argument that Mabira is made up of inferior timber species such as Kirundu and Paper Mulberry and thus should be degazzetted can only be put down to lack of understanding about the ecological and environmental attributes of the forest.
Masumbuko advances that SCOUL will always ensure legal compliance and has an environmental policy that strictly respects restricted reserve areas and therefore can never tamper with areas of special value. I wish to remind him that Mabira is of one of the critical biodiversity sites in the network of Uganda’s protected areas.
Therefore, if what SCOUL is saying is a company policy, then they would be making sure that this forest is well protected and all formerly encroached areas (by their workers in some areas) are restored.
The writer is Public Relations manager of National Forestry Authority
John Nagenda is away in London
Mr Emma Masumbuko’s letter entitled “Mehta explains Mabira sale†published in The Daily Monitor on September 1, was a rather deceptive one.
the National Forestry Authority (NFA) would like to clear the wrong impression it cast. The drive by SCOUL to degazette 7,100 hectares off Mabira for them to plant sugarcane has attracted a lot of media attention. In response, the media has given the topic acres of space in print and invaluable space on the airwaves.
SCOUL wants to change the land-use from forestry to sugarcane growing contrary to Uganda’s Forestry Policy Statement No. 1 in which government undertakes to actively protect, maintain and sustainably manage the current permanent forest estate. This provides an entry point for the media to report and allows the public freedom to give their views.
To add to the efforts of journalists that have been to the field and collected substantive information, we had had Uganda’s best known writers like John Nagenda, and Prof. Joe Oloka-Onyango pen down facts of professional tenure. We have also attended public debates where professional and academic papers have been presented. All these activities can not simply be rubbished as political intrigue and propaganda fuelled by opportunists. If what Masumbuko raised in his letter holds water, I challenge him and his employers to organise a public debate and present the “facts†instead of using a kakuyege approach that demeans the integrity of the NFA.
Masumbuko alleges that the public is fed on unresearched information by the media. I would like the public to know that SCOUL has circulated half-baked information that created an impression that what is left of Mabira is a stretch along the Jinja–Kampala highway. They have even at one point published something about there being one tree per 31 square metres.
This can only be laughable because Mabira is a very well stocked forest and one of our best natural forests in the country.
Recent exploratory inventories carried out in Mabira (for both the production and buffer zones) show that there are 167 cubic metres per hectare of merchantable timber trees which is approximately 400 trees in every hectare.
The forest is 100% free of encroachment, its boundaries are well maintained and NFA has undertaken enrichment planting in areas where SCOUL’s own employees had established gardens in the reserve.
Masumbuko alleges that together with one A.S. Rao, they have visited forest management officials and the NFA at Mabira.
Again, we can only laugh at this because NFA’s advice to Government is clear.
Converting Mabira into sugarcane growing will spell an environmental disaster for the central region in particular and this country in general. Whether encroached or not, the current status of Mabira is a Forest Reserve and not simply a forest. It is a home for trees (for timber and non-timber products) and other forms of life both flora and fauna.
Therefore, the argument that Mabira is made up of inferior timber species such as Kirundu and Paper Mulberry and thus should be degazzetted can only be put down to lack of understanding about the ecological and environmental attributes of the forest.
Masumbuko advances that SCOUL will always ensure legal compliance and has an environmental policy that strictly respects restricted reserve areas and therefore can never tamper with areas of special value. I wish to remind him that Mabira is of one of the critical biodiversity sites in the network of Uganda’s protected areas.
Therefore, if what SCOUL is saying is a company policy, then they would be making sure that this forest is well protected and all formerly encroached areas (by their workers in some areas) are restored.
The writer is Public Relations manager of National Forestry Authority
John Nagenda is away in London