Levi's Announces New Forest Product Policy

Asia Pulp and Paper is having a hard time holding onto customers these days. With the release of its forest products purchasing policy, Levi Strauss & Company has become the latest major brand to ban business with Asia Pulp and Paper (APP). This comes on the heels of a major public cancellation with APP affiliate Mercury Paper at the end of December by Kroger, America’s largest grocery chain.

So why is everyone running from APP?

APP has a nasty penchant for clearcutting Indonesia’s rainforests and disrespecting communities’ rights — and these abuses are proving to be bad for business. Despite the company’s deep pockets for slick PR greenwash campaigns, its tactics aren’t fooling a lot of customers. Over the past several years, a growing list of major companies have dropped their contracts with APP, including major US book publishers Scholastic, Hachette, and Simon & Schuster, leading toy companies Mattel, Hasbro and Lego, fashion giants Gucci and Tiffany and Co., and office supply stores Staples and Office Depot.

Levi’s new global policy not only excludes controversial fiber supplies linked to rainforest destruction (like that from APP), it also proactively maximizes the best environmental fibers available. For paper, it mandates that all paper purchased by the company be at least 30% post-consumer recycled content, with a goal of 100% whenever possible. When post-consumer recycled is not available, wood fiber must be certified by the Forest Stewardship Council.

Levi’s and other responsible corporate customers are implementing forward-looking policies that maximize the best environmental fiber and eliminate controversial sources. Meanwhile, reform for APP’s clearcutting ways still seems to be in the distant future. For the time being, it’s hard to imagine this list of APP customer cancellations doing anything but growing.

Two weeks ago Greenpeace International released a YouTube video detailing how pulped rainforest trees are ending up in the packaging of toys sold all over the world.  The video begins, “We got to wondering…who is using all the rainforest that is being destroyed in Indonesia?” The sad truth is that the answer to Greenpeace’s question is me, you, and probably our friends and family.

Greenpeace’s investigations revealed that several famous toy companies, including Mattel, Lego, Hasbro, and Disney, are using fiber from cleared Indonesian rainforests in the packaging for Barbies, Cinderella dolls, Transformers, Star Wars games, and more.

Two major pulp and paper companies, Asia Pulp and Paper and APRIL, are clearcutting Indonesia’s rainforests and replacing them with monoculture acacia plantations to make cheap paper for all sorts of consumer products. Last year, RAN discovered that fiber from Indonesia’s rainforests and the acacia plantations replacing them was also ending up in children’s books sold in the U.S., and in March we launched a campaign demanding that Disney, the world’s largest children’s book and magazine publisher, get Indonesian rainforest destruction out of all its paper products.

It’s absurd that children’s books, Barbie boxes and other paper products are driving the destruction of some of the world’s most biologically diverse rainforests, and it’s infuriating that everyday people are being made into unwitting participants in this travesty.

TAKE ACTION

Join the global campaign to tell APP and APRIL that enough is enough. It’s time to stop destroying precious rainforests, abusing forest peoples’ rights and fueling climate change.

The lab tests revealed that all three Disney books did come from rainforest destruction. See the test results below.

_________________________________________________________________________________________

The test results showed that one of the books contained mixed tropical hardwood fiber (MTH) coming from Indonesia’s natural forests, while all three contained acacia fiber coming from monoculture acacia plantations that are replacing Indonesia’s natural forests.

Like good environmentalists, the RAN team sent a letter to Disney telling the company that it had a serious environmental problem: the paper used in its books was driving Sumatran tiger extinction, contributing to climate change, and driving social conflict between agribusinesses and Indonesian forest communities. Since that initial letter (sent in April 2010), Disney has not resolved this problem, and in May of this year we launched a public campaign against Disney demanding that the company eliminate controversial Indonesian fiber from its supply chain; cut ties with Indonesian pulp and paper companies APP, APRIL and their affiliates; and implement a comprehensive paper purchasing policy that puts environmental and social safeguards in place and increases use of responsible alternatives.

The urgency of meeting these demands was underscored by a Greenpeace report released this past Tuesday. Greenpeace commissioned its own fiber testing of the packaging of ten Disney-licensed products. This time, the results showed that all ten product packages contained both mixed tropical hardwood fiber and acacia fiber. The packages were purchased in multiple countries, including the UK, Germany, and Brazil (test results below).

_________________________________________________________________________________________

Greenpeace’s test results demonstrate that Disney’s connection to Indonesian deforestation through its paper (whether it’s in its book paper, toy packaging, or anything else) is likely to be even more widespread and problematic than the company thought. Luckily for Disney, the answers are already out there. Eight of the top ten children’s book publishers in the U.S. have already committed to eliminating controversial Indonesian fiber and controversial suppliers APP, APRIL, and affiliates. Companies in many other sectors, such as Staples, Office Depot, and the Gucci Group, have also done so. And countless companies have comprehensive paper policies that could help guide Disney.

What can you do? Email Disney CEO Bob Iger today to tell him and his senior management team that rainforest destruction is no fairytale. You can also join our email list to keep up to date with the latest on our campaign to move Disney.

APP is highly proficient at using covert marketing and shady political strategies to grow its business in Indonesia and abroad. Today, NYTimes journalist Mike McIntire exposed some of APP’s questionable business practices with a frontpage piece highlighting APP’s latest antics in the U.S., including revelations of suspicious links between the company and Tea Party-esque groups like the Institute for Liberty and the Consumer Alliance for Global Prosperity.

While McIntire’s article should be enough to pique the interest of any curious reader, it really only scratches the surface of APP’s impact on the planet’s forests and climate and the company’s use of political manipulation as a business strategy. APP has wielded immense influence in the Indonesian government for decades due to the close political and economic ties between the company’s founder, Eka Tjipta Widjaja, and notorious former Indonesian dictator Suharto. APP’s record in Indonesia shows that the company has operated with near immunity from the law (it is estimated that over 50 percent of logging in Indonesia is done illegally) and almost complete disregard for the environment and human rights.

As APP expands into North American markets (the company just bought its 5^th Canadian mill this week), it seems clear that we should only expect more of the same. Environmental devastation, disregard for human rights, and political manipulation are APP’s modus operandi, and groups like Consumer Alliance for Global Prosperity (CAGP) are spinning APP’s corporate interests and misdeeds into populist misinformation — manipulating APP customers and tea party advocates alike.

The good news is that RAN and others have been campaigning for the past several years to get APP to change its nasty ways. Within the last year, eight of the ten major U.S. children’s book publishers have moved away from APP and their main competitor APRIL as well as eliminated controversial Indonesian fiber from their books until it can be shown that reforms have been made in the industry.

Our team at RAN is committed to seeing this work through and to calling APP’s bluff until the company comes clean and stops destroying rainforests and misusing its power. We hope you’ll join us. Sign up to be a Rainforest-Free Paper Rapid Responder and we’ll let you know whenever there are things you can do to help hold rainforest-destroying companies like APP accountable.

“The way to get started is to quit talking and begin doing.

Books can be a great source of new ideas, inspiration, and discovery, especially for kids. Walt Disney knew this, which is why Disney stories often carry inspirational messages for kids, urging them to dream big and imagine magical kingdoms full of laughter and happiness.

That’s why it’s so tragic  that the paper policy Disney announced last week completely fails to ensure the company’s children’s books won’t continue to be made from the world’s last remaining rainforests.

The new paper policy is Disney’s response to RAN’s demand for action, and it covers the company’s U.S. publishing business, which produces 50 million books and 30 million magazines a year. That’s a lot of trees. Here at RAN we had high hopes for this policy, but, to our dismay, the policy does little for the world’s forests.

The Disney policy states that, “Disney seeks to have 100% of paper sourced for product and packaging by its non-licensed businesses be sustainable. The paper sourced will contain recycled content, be sourced from certified forests, or be of known source origin.”

RAN fully supports making books from recycled content, especially the post-consumer type — it has the smallest environmental footprint. Kudos to Disney for including recycled. Unfortunately, it’s not clear how much recycled content Disney is committing to in this policy. Are we talking 5% by 2014 or 45% by the year’s end? There’s a big difference, and that’s why we tell companies that strong policies must include numeric, time-bound goals on percentage of post-consumer recycled content — something Disney missed in its policy.

Sadly, the un-quantified recycled content may be the policy’s strongest point. When reading the fine print on “certified forests,” the policy falls even shorter. On certification, the policy states: “Disney shall accept certification documentation for recycled and virgin paper from the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), Programme for Endorsement of Forest Certification Claims (PEFC), Canadian Standards Association (CSA), and the Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI). Additional certification systems may be evaluated by Disney on a case-by-case basis.”

While variety may be the spice of life, right now only one forest certification provides even marginal assurance that environmental and socially responsible practices are being met, and that is the FSC. While other leading companies like Scholastic, Hachette, Timberland, Gucci Group, and many others include a clear preference for FSC-certified forest products in their corporate policies, Disney does not. In excluding this preference, Disney implies that all certifications are equal for the world’s forests and forest peoples. This is simply untrue. Here’s one useful comparison highlighting some key differences in certification schemes and showing that FSC performs better.

The last of the three criteria for paper products included in Disney’s paper policy is that they be of “known source origin,” meaning that they were not illegally harvested. While legality is a minimum bar, and we encourage all companies to know where their supply is coming from and ensure it is legal, legality almost never equates to environmental and social responsibility — and certainly not in Indonesia. What’s worse is that the only proof the Disney policy requires is a declaration of legality by the supplier — the party with the greatest interest in claiming the products they are selling is legal, whether that’s 100% true or not.

So what does all this mean? What does RAN really have to say to Disney?

We say live up to your own values, Disney. Your policy states that “Nature conservation is a top Disney priority.” Yet, the content of the current Disney policy does not ensure that Indonesia’s rainforests (or other endangered forests) won’t be pulped for Disney books.

Other U.S. children’s publishers, including Scholastic, Hachette, Simon & Schuster, and many others, have comprehensive paper policies and additional commitments to move away from controversial Indonesian suppliers Asia Pulp and Paper (APP) and APRIL while eliminating controversial Indonesian fiber until key reforms have been undertaken. Disney can certainly do as well as their peers.

The clock is ticking for Indonesia’s rainforests, Disney. As Walt once said, “The way to get started is to quit talking and begin doing.”

As the latest fashion trends were just unveiled at New York’s spring Fashion Week, it seems an appropriate moment for an update on RAN’s work in the fashion world. Unfortunately, our update  is not an uplifting one.

As you might recall, back in December 2009, PAK 2000, a luxury shopping bag manufacturer, announced that they would cut all financial ties with its majority shareholder Asia Pulp and Paper (APP) by the end of 2009. The company also committed to work with RAN to develop and implement a leadership paper policy that gives preference to recycled and FSC-certified paper and phases out all controversial and high conservation value forest fiber, including all fiber from Indonesia, from its paper products within 180 days.

PAK 2000 broke their promises.

After attempting to work with PAK 2000 for a year to verify and implement its commitments, RAN was unable to make progress, and RAN’s Executive Director Rebecca Tarbotton issued the following letter to PAK 2000’s customers in December 2010:

Dear Sir or Madam:

In December last year, PAK 2000 made commitments to your company, to RAN and to other customers to sever its connection with Asia Pulp and Paper, stop sourcing Indonesian and other controversial paper and fiber and adopt a best in class paper purchasing policy. I am deeply disappointed to inform you that PAK 2000 has failed to meet these commitments and appears to be unwilling to do so. Because of this, I once again urge you to suspend contact and business with PAK 2000. RAN believes this company is both misleading and continues to contribute to the destruction of Indonesia’s rainforests.

Since making these commitments last December, PAK 2000’s founder and former CEO Claude Roessiger has been forced out, and control of the company has been taken back by Asia Pulp and Paper (APP) under the leadership of long time APP associate Howard Lo.

After learning that PAK 2000 had a new CEO in May, RAN representatives traveled to New Hampshire for a meeting scheduled with Mr. Lo and his senior management team in July. However, Mr. Lo canceled his participation in the meeting and subsequent requests for a meeting have gone unanswered.

In July, RAN was able to meet with PAK 2000’s CFO and learned that PAK 2000 is failing to meet the commitments made to your company and to RAN, including:

1. Severing “connections” with APP;

2. Stopping the purchase of papers with controversial fiber (including fiber from Indonesia) within 180 days; and,

3. Adopting a “leadership” paper procurement policy with an FSC preference.

We believe that APP misrepresented facts relating to the transfer of ownership away from APP to Mr. Roessiger and PAK 2000’s management at the time and, by extension, to RAN and your company. In December, we were told that APP divested their majority shares of PAK 2000 by selling to the Dutch holding company Overveen and no longer had an interest in PAK 2000. However, over the spring and summer, we learned that Overveen is listed as owned by an individual in Taiwan. When colleagues endeavored to contact the person at the address listed for Overveen, nobody of that name could be found at the address. We became suspicious and conducted subsequent research, which revealed that Mr. Lo has been an employee of APP-controlled companies for over a decade (see Nippecraft 2009 Annual Report).

Our conclusion is that PAK 2000 is back under APP control and has lied to the staff of PAK 2000, RAN and your company. The transparency and trust that had been growing though our negotiations with PAK 2000 under Mr. Roessiger’s leadership, and that had been a cornerstone of the voluntary agreement reached between PAK 2000 and RAN, have disappeared. Further, PAK 2000 has reneged on their commitments to eliminate controversial fiber by July 2010 and to adopt an FSC preference procurement policy. In fact, as an affiliate of APP, PAK 2000 may lose its FSC chain of custody certification entirely.

Given these developments, RAN can no longer recommend PAK 2000 as an environmentally responsible or reliable business partner. We urge you to eliminate any business you have with PAK 2000 due to the company’s failure to meet its commitments, lack of transparency and links to APP, a company whose history is rife with social, environmental and financial controversy.

We apologize to you for any confusion and inconvenience this new information may provoke and look forward to learning what actions your company will take given this new information.

I’m talking about Indonesia’s Ministry of Forestry and their potential role in the country’s anticipated moratorium on deforestation.

A presidential decree outlining the scope, administration and content of the moratorium was supposed to come out on January 1, 2011, but Indonesia’s president, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, is caught in the middle of a fight over several versions of the text. One version has been drafted by the country’s REDD+ Taskforce and looks to be considerably more effective in helping reduce deforestation and linked emissions. Several other versions have been drafted by the Ministry of Forestry and others, such as the Coordinating Minister for the Economy, and would do little for the forests, climate and communities that depend on these areas for their livelihoods.

A recent investigation by the Indonesian government in Central Kalimantan sheds some light on potential problems associated with enlisting the Ministry of Forestry to lead a moratorium on deforestation.

Here’s the investigation details from the Jakarta Post: Out of 967 plantation and mining farms in the province, 891 companies were found to be operating without proper permits — that is, illegally. The 1999 Forestry Law stipulates that permits to use forests for business purposes should be issued by the Forestry Ministry in Jakarta. The task force investigation found that out of 325 plantation companies with a total area of 4.6 million hectares, only 67 obtained permits from the Forestry Ministry. In the mining sector, of 615 registered companies in the province, only nine hold permits to convert forests in an area of 30,000 hectares. Potential losses were estimated to be 158.5 trillion rupiah ($17.6 billion US dollars) in the province alone.

As the President debates the various versions of the moratorium, no doubt with a lot of political pressure weighing upon him, I would put one question to him: “Are logging interests — who run the Ministry of Forestry — ready to take the lead in stopping deforestation?” Their track record suggests not. It would be a shame to squander this opportunity for Indonesia to continue its leadership in reducing climate pollution from deforestation and creating the foundation for green and just “low carbon” development.

The publishing world is rapidly changing as technology influences where, when, and how an author goes about getting published. San Francisco’s very own Litquake extravaganza delves into this further and works to help authors navigate the new terrain. Two events directly relate to our Rainforest Free Paper Campaign and are worth blogging, talking, and tweeting about.

Event: Off the Richter Scale: AltPub

• Title: Who Needs a Publisher?
• Location: Variety Preview Room Theater, 582 Market St
• Date/Time: Oct 3rd, 1-2PM

This discussion analyzes the current publishing framework and questions whether authors really need to go through one of the big six publishers to gain notoriety. Thanks to on-demand and social publishing, small publishers, and e-books there are a variety of effective alternatives. Our opinion? Options are great! Some of the large publishers are buying paper from APP & APRIL, companies that are clearing and converting Indonesia’s rainforests to monoculture plantations to make cheap paper. While the AltPub event offers authors advice on how to achieve literary success, we want authors to publish through environmentally friendly distribution channels – whether they be one of the big six publishers, on-demand publishing, or anything else. For more on our work, check out our report at www.ran.org/bookreport.

Event: Enviro-Lit Panel:

• Title: The Sustainable Solution to the Economy
• Location: Beach Chalet, 1000 Great Hwy
• Date/Time: Oct 3 6:30PM-7:30PM

Not only is technology acting as a publishing game-changer, but climate change is as well. This discussion is worth being part of, as expert panelists address this issue head-on. What economic repercussions will we face if we ignore these environmental issues? How will this affect our government and what power do individuals have to make an impact? With environmental reporter and editor of Bay Area Report for The NY Times, Felicity Barringer moderating this event, it is sure to be worthwhile.

October 3rd is shaping up to be a pretty informative and inspiring day. These issues covered at Litquake speak directly to the overarching goals of our Rainforest Free Paper Campaign and we thank Litquake for being so environmentally and socially responsible!

On September 9th, at the Forest Industry Development Conference at Melbourne, Gunns announced that it will shift to a plantation-based business. Mr. L’Estrange, the new chief executive of Gunns, said “the vast support of the Australian population is with the environmental non-government organisations” and “native forest is not part of our future.” He continued, “we see that the conflict largely has to end. Our employees and the communities we operate in have been collateral damage to this process.”

This decision comes after years of campaigning by environmental organizations, and a directive earlier this year from the  Tasmanian government to Gunns Ltd. and Forestry Tasmania to seek certification under the Forest Stewardship Council.

Rainforest Action Network worked with international allies to pressure Gunns starting in 2005, just after Gunns brought 17 individuals and 3 organizations to court for publicly criticizing their destruction of Tasmania’s old growth forests. Japanese customers demanded the woodchips for FSC certified papers as RAN requested, and this demand, in combination with pressure from other international allies, helped shift the paradigm, leading to the latest announcements by Gunns Ltd.

While Gunns’ announcements are reason to celebrate, challenges still remain. There is evidence that Gunns is still engaged in old growth logging at this time. Support from people all across the world is still required to hold Gunns and the Australian government accountable for all the positive commitments that have been made in recent months for Tasmania’s forests.

Thanks to all of you who supported this campaign over the years and may it be a reminder of the power of people working together internationally to protect the world’s remaining ancient forests.

Posted on behalf of Toyo Kawakami, RAN Japan, Forest Campaigner

The Jakarta Globe reported that a teenage boy was mauled by Sumatran tiger in the Senepis area of Indonesia, an area where Asia Pulp and Paper ( a subsidiary of Sinar Mas Group) along with other Sinar Mas-associated companies have expanded their natural forest clearance operations.

Later that day, Asia Pulp and Paper ran an ad in the New York Times stating that it took its responsibility as stewards of the environment seriously. The ad proclaims, “We support programs that preserve 261,930 acres in the Senepis Tiger Sanctuary…”

Dubbed under the tagline “APP Cares,” the ad’s heading reads,  “To see our commitment to biodiversity, just follow our tracks.” Given the timing, the allusion to tiger tracks now just seems a perverse irony.

NY Times Ad: Another Greenwash Attempt by APP

Looking at the New York Times ad, I wonder what does APP’s “caring” really mean? If a boy was eaten by a tiger that lost its habitat in the area that APP operates but publicly claims to be preserving, their care or “support” seems, at the very least, a little suspect.

The Jakarta Globe explains that Sumatran tigers’ habitat is threatened by rampant deforestation, which causes many tigers to roam into villages or onto plantations in search of food, setting off conflicts with humans.

What the Jakarta Globe doesn’t say is that much of this deforestation is for pulp and paper and palm oil – two industries dominated by Sinar Mas and Asia Pulp and Paper.

While I would truly love to believe that APP does care about tigers, people and the planet, they are going to have to do more than run greenwashing ads in the New York Times to convince me.

**For more information: See the Eyes on the Forest report documenting APP’s  logging activities that directly threatened tiger habitat in the Senepis area.

Sumatran Tiger: Photo By Brimack/Creative Commons

This week the Jakarta Globe reported that a teenager named Ahmad Rafi was killed by a Sumatran tiger. He was mauled while he and his parents were tapping rubber trees in their plantation in Rimbo Melintang, a village in Riau province on the island of Sumatra.

When I first read this, I felt sick. I thought what a horrible way to die. What a horrible thing for your family to see. No one should have to die in such a way.

Then when processing this news on a deeper level, it made me angry. I realized that Rimbo Melintang is in the Senepis area, an area where Asia Pulp and Paper ( a subsidiary of Sinar Mas Group) along with other Sinar Mas-associated companies have expanded their natural forest clearance operations in five concessions.

In 2009, Eyes on the Forests released a study that showed that most violent incidents between people and tigers in Sumatra’s Riau Province occurred near forests being cleared by paper giant Asia Pulp & Paper (APP) and associated companies. Specifically, at least 147 of 245, or 60 percent, of all human-tiger conflicts in Riau occurred in the Senepis area.

As Asia Pulp and Paper clears and converts rainforests in the Senepis area and elsewhere in Indonesia, they eradicate tiger habitat, forcing tigers to roam into villages or onto plantations in search of food and setting off conflicts with unsuspecting humans like Ahmad Rafi.

While on the surface, the death of Amhad Rafi seems like a distant tragedy for most Americans, the reality is that there is a connection for all of us. Ahmad Rafi was a victim of deforestation and the unsustainable practices of Indonesian pulp and paper companies, and American demand for cheap paper products, like copy paper, toilet paper, and even books, is driving this deforestation.

As American consumers, we can try to honor Ahmad Rafi and his community by ensuring that our purchases don’t come from companies that are razing rainforests in the Senepis area or elsewhere in Indonesia. Find out more about our effect on Indonesian wildlife and what you can do about it by attending a Hot August Nights screening near you this month.

While illegal logging may happen in Indonesia, it is occurring, largely as a result of consumer demand for cheap wood products in other places, like the United States, and due to governments’ complicity for illegal products all along the supply chain. This undermines the strength and sustainability of the forest products’ economy in both Indonesia and the United States by distorting prices, undercutting sustainably manufactured products, and jeopardizing jobs and good working conditions.

In 2008 the U.S. government decided to take action to address the problems associated with illegal logging by amending its long-standing Lacey Act. The Lacey Act, which prohibits trafficking and sales of illegally sourced wildlife and plants, was amended to prohibit commerce in illegally sourced plants, including wood products. The new law was a significant change for the forest products sector and created a previously non-existent level of responsibility all along the supply chain.

So is the Lacey Act amendment working?

A recent report by Chatham House says yes. The study states it has “already identified positive effects of the Lacey Act amendment in terms of the response of producer and processing-country governments and the private sector.” The authors estimate that if cut down, the forests protected by these policies would have emitted between 1.2 billion and 14.6 billion tons of carbon dioxide – at the upper end, almost double the US’s annual greenhouse gas emissions.

Overall illegal logging declined as much as 25% worldwide over the past decade – some of which has certainly resulted from new enforcement in consumer countries. While this is good news for forests, the Chatham House authors and RAN agree that there is much more to be done.

The Lacey Act must be strengthened through the inclusion of highly processed wood products; companies in consumer nations must mandate that illegal and other controversial supplies are not entering their supply chain, and these market signals must be pushed down the supply chain to key manufacturing countries like China; governments in supplier nations like Indonesia must create and enforce meaningful policy; and a consistent global commitment to stem the trade of illegally sourced wood products must be made and enforced.

To learn more about RAN’s work on Indonesian deforestation, visit http://www.ran.org/category/issue/paper.

Terra the Tiger at BookExpo 2010

Last week, RAN’s Rainforest Free Paper team attended BookExpo America, the biggest publishing event in the U.S. An unusual part of the team really stood out from the 20,000+ crowd…a Sumatran tiger named Terra.

Terra traveled all the way to BookExpo to tell the story of her home in Indonesia. Sadly, only 400-500 Sumatran tigers still exist in the wild, and their habitat is being lost at a rapid rate as pulp and paper companies cut down rainforests to provide cheap paper for copy paper, toilet paper, and even children’s books.

Terra spent her days at BookExpo talking to children’s book publishers about what they could do to help prevent her rainforest home from being further destroyed.

Handing out RAN’s latest report on rainforest fiber in children’s books and buttons declaring “I Love Books AND Rainforests,” she made many new friends who posed with Terra for photos and signed a petition to the book industry demanding sustainable paper be used in their children’s books.

Now it’s up to individual publishers to do their part to ensure that Indonesian forest destruction is not in their books. Hopefully no Sumatran tigers will have to attend BookExpo 2011.

We just released a report today, entitled Turning the Page on Rainforest Destruction: Children’s books and the future of Indonesia’s rainforests, detailing the results of our book testing and the importance of Indonesia’s rainforests. The report shows that despite environmental paper policy commitments by many U.S. book publishers, nine of the top ten publishers had fiber linked to Indonesian rainforest destruction in their books.

Ironically, these books whose paper sources are endangering Indonesia’s forests and the world’s climate, have much to teach us and the next generation about the importance of the world’s rainforests and climate change. One book that tested positive for rainforest destruction, tells us, “The only true tree-dwelling apes, orangutans are found in Indonesian rain forests.” Another continues, “Orangutans have become rare partly because their forest habitat has been cut down…” Finally, another book contexts the orangutan’s plight more broadly, stating, “in 1800, rain forest covered about 15 percent of Earth’s total land area; today less than 7 percent of Earth’s total land area is rain forest. Logging and deforestation destroy rain forest habitat and threaten the wildlife that depend on it.” It continues, “After the rain forest trees are cut down, the remaining roots, stumps, and undergrowth are burned to clear the land, releasing the stored carbon into the atmosphere.”

Our report concludes by calling on the publishing industry to take leadership and ensure that rainforest destruction from Indonesia (or elsewhere) does not end up in their supply chain. To join in the action and ask U.S. book publishers to turn the page on rainforest destruction, sign our petition telling the U.S. book industry that you love books and rainforests and don’t want to choose one over the other.

For the full report, go to www.ran.org/bookreport.

Sago is a starch extracted from the pith of sago palm stems. These palms grow in tropical lowland forest and freshwater swamps across Southeast Asia and serve as a major food staple for people in the region. In Tebing Tinggi, their sago farm is owned and run by hundreds of families and provides both food and a good source of income to the community.

Tebing Tinggi’s sago farm is being threatened by Indonesia’s pulp and paper industry.

The village head told us that their community’s sago farm was under threat by Indonesia’s second largest pulp and paper company, Asia Pacific Resources International Holdings Limited (APRIL). He told us that APRIL had received a cutting permit from the Indonesian government to clear the forest where their sago palms grow. With this permit, APRIL had entered the area with bulldozers and logging machinery and started cutting. However, the community had not agreed to this. In fact, the community actively opposes APRIL’s presence, and they have declared their opposition to the government, the company, and through banners hung on their main streets.

The people of Tebing Tinggi continue to fight to keep APRIL out of their forests and to keep their sago farm productive. But they need our support to tell companies in the U.S. that we also oppose pulp and paper companies’ expansion into Indonesian forests and on community lands. APRIL and their competitor Asia Pulp and Paper (APP) produce paper from Indonesian rainforest destruction for books, copy paper, and toilet paper being sold in the U.S. and elsewhere.

Peat is an accumulation of partially decayed plant matter that forms in wetland bogs, moors, and peat swamp forests, amongst other places. Dead vegetation got you interested yet? Well, stick with me – there’s more to it.  Peat is getting a lot of play these days because it is a big reason why Indonesia was named the world’s third biggest greenhouse emitter, after China and the United States, in 2006.

In Indonesia, carbon-rich peatlands are being cleared to make way for pulp-and-paper and palm oil plantations. In order to create pulpwood plantations and other developments on peatlands, these water-saturated ecosystems must first be drained. This causes the newly-dried peat to decompose, releasing massive greenhouse gas emissions. The peat is then susceptible to burning, which contributes additional carbon to the atmosphere.

Clearing for pulp plantation, Riau province, Sumatra

While in Indonesia I met with people from a number of peatland communities. From person after person, community after community, I heard that Indonesian pulp paper companies are coming onto communities’ lands without their consent to log existing forest and develop new acacia plantations to feed their pulp mills. Some of these communities and the NGOs that work with them recently called for international buyers and investors in the Indonesia pulp and paper sector to require fundamental reforms before conducting further business with the sector.

Drainage canal, Riau Province, Sumatra

At current levels of drainage and use, the pulp and paper and palm oil sectors are releasing around one billion tons of CO2 per year from peatlands alone, constituting more than half of Indonesia’s economy-wide greenhouse gas emissions. Meanwhile, pulp-and-paper plantations on peatlands have historically had very low productivity and high operational cost, generating less than one percent of Indonesia’s GDP while creating more than 50 percent of the nation’s greenhouse gas emissions.

That’s it for Peat 101. Stay tuned for more on my trip to Indonesia, peat, and stories from peatland communities…

PT Artelindo, Eyes on the Forest

Long a controversial company, APP has recently stepped up its public relations efforts with a series of infomercials touting its environmental and social accom-plishments and its misleading certification claims. These moves may be an effort to pave the way for the company’s anticipated issuing of bonds and a possible initial public offering (IPO) of its Chinese division, and comes at the same time as new investments in direct sales capacity in Europe and North American paper markets.

PAK 2000 announced that they will cut all financial ties with their majority shareholder Asia Pulp and Paper (APP), likely the biggest destroyer of Indonesian rainforests, by the end of 2009. Additionally, they are working with RAN to develop and implement a leadership paper policy that preferences recycled and FSC certified paper and phases out all controversial and high conservation value forest fiber, including all fiber from Indonesia, from its paper products within 180 days.

Photo: Greenpeace Indonesia

Thanks to all of you for your support in making Indonesian rainforest protection this year’s fashion trend. From PAK 2000’s move away from APP to the paper policies of Gucci Group, Tiffany’s & Co., Ferragamo, H&M Group, and more, the fashion industry is taking tangible and positive steps for Indonesian rainforests and the climate!

This victory is a key milestone in our continuing work to protect Indonesia’s rainforests and expose one of the world’s biggest forest and climate criminals, Asia Pulp and Paper and its parent company Sinar Mas Group.

Stay tuned for what comes next!

Kemal Jufri/Imaji, for The New York Times

Cutting forests and converting them to plantations will not  save forests, stem climate change or achieve community development. APRIL’s proposal is based on the self-serving and erroneous assumption that the entire Kampar peninsula will be lost.  In fact, there are other viable conservation and development scenarios for the Kampar that are based on recognizing community land rights and protecting remaining natural forests and peatlands.

A REDD treaty with credible forest definitions and effective safeguards must serve to provide resources for exactly these type of low carbon development scenarios rather than subsidize business as usual packaged solutions.

Today Gucci Group, the prestigious conglomerate of fashion and luxury brands, including such brands as Yves Saint Laurent, Alexander McQueen, Stella McCartney, and Balenciaga, announced their move out of Indonesian and other endangered forests as a first step in implementing an industry-leading paper policy.  This policy is a continuation of the Gucci Group’s interest in curbing climate change, about twenty percent of which stems from forest loss, and through it, the Gucci Group has pledged to reduce the amount of paper it uses, eliminate fiber from high conservation value forests, and only purchase recycled products or those certified by the Forest Stewardship Council by December 2010.

Gucci Group’s leadership is commendable and sets Indonesian rainforest protection as the new fall trend for other fashion and luxury brands to follow.  Gucci Group’s policy puts it at the front of a list of major companies—including Tiffany & Co., H&M Group, Hugo Boss, and Ferragamo—that have decided  they don’t want their brands to be associated with the destruction of rainforests or with encouraging climate change.

Not everyone has caught onto the new fall fashion trend, however. Three companies that could use some encouragement to follow Gucci Group’s lead are Calvin Klein, Coach, and Marc Jacobs.

Our research indicates that these companies are implicated in Indonesian rainforest destruction through purchasing throwaway paper shopping bags from Asia Pulp and Paper (APP) and its affiliates. APP is the biggest Indonesian rainforest destroyer for paper and is responsible for past and ongoing clearing and converting of vast areas of rainforests and peat lands in Sumatra and Borneo.

I am sure that Calvin Klein, Coach, and Marc Jacobs can do better than doing business with some of Indonesia’s worst rainforest destroyers. Gucci Group has demonstrated that the fashion industry can make a difference for rainforests and for the climate. Now it’s time for the others to join.

Calvin Klein, Coach and Marc Jacobs should follow Gucci’s lead, and stop purchasing throwaway paper shopping bags from Asia Pulp and Paper (APP) and others who source from Indonesian and Endangered Forests. By implementing leadership paper policies, Calvin Klein, Coach and Marc Jacobs have the opportunity to protect rainforests and the climate and make Indonesian rainforest protection a fall fashion trend that won’t be forgotten.