PNGAF MAGAZINE ISSUE # 9B-5B4B1 of 12th July 2021 EMINENT TPNG FORESTER JIM BELFORD

AUSTRALIAN FORESTERS in PAPUA NEW GUINEA 1922-1975

PNGAF MAGAZINE ISSUE # 9B -5B4B1 of 12th July 2021 FOREST MANAGEMENT. Eminent TPNG Forester Jim Belford.

WHAT OF THE FUTURE?

Jim Belford 2011

The Royal Commission of 1906 at Samarai. Seated left to right W.E.Parry-Okeden, Col. J.A.K Mackay, C E Herbert Standing Left George Belford1 government guide and on the right E Harris.

Source Mitchell Library.

Members of the PNG Forestry Trade Training Board 1997 UNITECH Lae. (L to R) Kanawi Pouru GM National Forest Authority, Frank Corin Principal Timber Industry Training College, Dr Brian Richards Team Leader and Dick McCarthy ANUTECH/AusAID Human Resource Development Project,and Jim Belford2 Executive Officer PNG Forest Industry Association. Absen.t Dr Phillip Siaguru Head Forest Department UNITECH. Photo Credit March 1997 National Forests and Timber Newspaper.

Editor R B McCarthy3 2021.

1

Note George Belford is related to Jim Belford TPNG Forests 1970-1981.

Jim Belford TPNG Forests 1970-1981 3 Dick McCarthy District Forester TPNG Forests 1963-1975.

2

1

Jim’s Story - WHAT OF THE FUTURE? Highly experienced in PNG Forestry and PNG Public Affairs, Forester Jim Belford, outlined in 2011 what is perceived by most former and current PNG foresters, as the long-term futuristic outlook for PNG forests. Jim was invited to present the Keynote Address for the International Year of the Forest (IYF) Seminar in Lae PNG. Mihi cura futuri – To us is the care of the future.

(AFS Motto). His keynote paper follows on pages 3 to 13.

Jim’s approach to PNG has always been forward looking. His association with PNG predates his own presence there – his eldest brother was an APC geologist there in 1950-1953 and played Rugby League for Magani when there were only Paga and Magani clubs in Port Moresby. Now 90, he still has the Rep Jacket with the large Lakatoi and coconut palms on the pocket which they had for offshore games against North Queensland and Fiji back in the day.

Way prior to that a brother of his great-great-grandfather had moved to Samoa from England in the early to mid-1800’s. In the early history of the Samarai/Port Moresby /Papua area two Belford brothers (mixed race Samoans) are mentioned in the early settlements, trading and in the evolution of Hiri Motu and some scientific exploration (with D’Albertis he thinks up the Lakekamu River). George Belford was involved with the Royal Commission of 1905 looking into the development of the Papuan people, as an interpreter and Government Guide. George even got to the summit of Mt. Yule in 1890. He has been told that there are Belford headstones on Logea Island in the Samarai District.

All Jim’s children were born in PNG. He still has family there, via a daughter and 3 grandsons who live in Port Moresby. Her husband is a senior project manager whose family connections go back to the days when Queen Emma was in her glory days in the islands. Other family connections exist which will take his contact further into continuing involvement in PNG into the future. His contact with PNG, directly and indirectly, has been an in-depth and extended one, and continues.

Forestry is about field activity. He was privileged to spend a good deal of time out in the forest environment, and in industry field operations. He was intimately involved on the ground in hands-on preparation for major industry start-ups in Western, Gulf, Central, and Manus Provinces and carried out many consulting tasks involving field work across many parts of PNG from Tonolei to Kiunga.

Finally, Jim pays a respectful tribute to the National field officers at all levels for their dedication in many difficult and onerous field situations and the field “breaking-in” of many inexperienced expatriate foresters to the ways of the bush in PNG. He still reflects on his field days with some nostalgia, along with the thought that the quiet rustle in the background – the next generation of forests and foresters, will continue to serve Papua New Guinea with positive results.

Long term forester and resident of PNG Jim Belford described what could be the future scenario for forestry in his keynote address of 2011. “PNG for the next forty years and beyond”.

Forests have always been a strategic resource, and a secure way into the future for PNG. It requires the involvement of foresters in the commercial business of forestry who must strive for optimum results for PNG where the industry ownership and resource ownership are in the same hands.

2

Jim Belford’s Keynote Paper: IYF Seminar Lae August 2011.

The next 40 years and Beyond.

Preamble.

I am happy to present this Paper to this Seminar marking the International Year of Forests. Unfortunately, other commitments preclude my personal attendance and the opportunity of mixing again with colleagues across the board, and particularly with the field forestry cadre and those charged with management of the regulation, operational management, and planning for the sector in both public and private areas into the future.

I have been intimately involved in the whole spectrum of forestry in PNG for the last 40 years as a Government forester, private enterprise manager, industrial advocate, and private consultant and have many enduring memories in the field of forestry in Papua New Guinea, probably none more vivid than the early days, when in 1970 I learned “at the rock face” for that first year and during subsequent field exercises in survey camps and operations in many locations across this wonderful country.

In this Paper I have been asked to address where Forestry might be heading in Papua New Guinea for the next 40 years and beyond, and to do this it might be useful to examine where we have been, in the process of preparing for the future.

I ask your indulgence if I cut corners in treating this task in a shortened manner. It would be impossible to outline all significant elements of the past in 20 minutes or so.

Because there is so much ground to cover, I have used a point structure in some areas, and apologize in advance if this gives rise to further questions – but isn’t that one of the purposes of the Seminar?

I will touch on the early history and cover some aspects of forestry over the last 40 years to put into context where we are now in PNG in this regard, how we got here, and I will also gaze into my crystal ball to get a feel of where we would like to be or might be in another 40 years.

My comments are based on personal experience and perspectives developed during my time in various positions and functions. I will not be presenting statistics or data, I am sure this will be available in plenty throughout the Seminar sessions, and my aim is to give my personal insight into aspects of forestry and commercial development over that period.

Introduction.

When I first arrived in Port Moresby in March 1970, I joined a strongly expatriatestaffed Department of Forests with HQ at Konedobu, at about the midpoint of major forest inventories across PNG. In coming to PNG as a forester, I joined the ranks of many who followed in the steps of Charles Lane Poole, the first forester to undertake field work in what is now Papua New Guinea, in the 1920’s. His story cements his place as the progenitor of forestry practice in PNG through initial surveys and field collections and is recommended reading for those with an historical interest in the development of forestry in PNG. I have strong memories of the field work undertaken in the 1970’s and my later experience, and the sense of the brotherhood of foresters then which I’m sure is still 3

alive and well today. You just do not forget the field experiences and I could tell many yarns if time permitted.

At Independence I stayed on, and I must admit that it has been an interesting journey in a challenging personal and professional environment.

Early Legislation and Establishment.

Timber has always been a strategic commodity, and in the early days of colonization, say from the 1850’s, material for construction came through either trade arrangements or outright purchase of small parcels of land from traditional owners, which included rights to standing timber.

By the mid-1930’s, a need was seen to develop regulation of the forestry sector, and this was done by the Australian Administration through a Forestry Act which leaned heavily on the Queensland Forest Act of that time. This did, for application in the then Territory of Papua and New Guinea, include the transfer of forest rights through Timber Rights Purchases, where rights to forest resources were acquired by the Administration, leaving it to regulate commercial forest production activity, while outright land ownership rights remained with the traditional owners.

During the immediate post-World War 2 period, the Angau Administration set up several sawmills in major centres to kick start post-war reconstruction. For example, the old market location in Lae was the site of an Angau sawmill, and similar sites can be found in other centres, e.g., Rabaul and Madang. When private enterprise began to move into timber production, and the sector became private enterprise oriented, the Administration removed itself from direct operational involvement and focused on regulation of a growing economic sub-sector.

From the appointment of the first Head of Department, J.B.McAdam, to the appointment of Mr. Andrew Yauieb as the first National Forestry Degree holder and later occupants of this position, including Mr. Oscar Mamalai, and since then, the administration of “forestry” in PNG has always been on the front foot. These latter two gentlemen had been the only forestry qualified Heads in the forestry fields most senior position until the appointment of Mr. Kanawi Pouru in 2007. There has been constant transition in scale, administration, and field practice, and I for one hope that a forestry background is a prerequisite for future appointments made to the most senior ranks of the PNG Forest Authority into the future.

At early stages of activity when I first arrived in PNG, the technical staff of the Department was mainly concerned with forest inventory, planning operational guidelines, securing Timber Rights Purchases, allocations, strong field monitoring of harvesting and marketing operations, and a strong research element, along with the training of a competent National forestry cadre through the Forestry College at Bulolo, and later, professional levels through Unitech.

With some modifications, Timber Rights Purchases remained the norm for forest resource acquisition until the early 1970’s, when the Private Dealings Act was formalized, which also allowed traditional owners to deal directly with timber operators over forest rights, subject to checks and balances. It remains my view that while the philosophy behind the Act was sound, it was ineffectively written and over time became the subject of manipulation.

4

For this reason and due to apparent attempts to manipulate markets, the Commission of Inquiry into the Forest Industries Council and Related Matters was convened in the late 1980’s, giving rise to the findings of the Commission under Justice Tos Barnett. It was established that not all was well in the sector’s administration or in private enterprise practices, particularly in field practices and marketing ethics, and as a result, by 1991 Papua New Guinea had its current Forest Act (as amended), designed to rationalize problem areas and to point the sector in a bold new direction, that of sustainability following sound forest management protocols and practices.

While this basic structure is intact, there is little “meat” on the bones of the Act, and the need and intention to rectify this is reflected in the current National Forest Development Guidelines and in the Corporate Plan for the PNGFA, both of which warrant periodic examination.

Recent developments The commercial forestry sector in PNG is financially strong, experienced, and able to exert considerable leverage in the marketplace, while public sector administration and resource owner groups remain under-resourced and transitional, some would say in a condition of passive dependency, and yet to achieve the objectives set out in the Forestry Act. Overall, the scoreboard to date is one of mixed results, but headed in the right direction, needing a strong capacity and stable leadership in the public area and engagement of progressive commercial entities in private enterprise.

While the PNGFA remains in a transitional phase and there may be some way to go, there does exist a cadre of capable and professional officers at HQ level and in the field, who are making a difference, and who continue to progress the PNGFA’s development under difficult circumstances. Under-resourcing appears to remain a chronic impediment to fulfilment of the stated objectives of the Forestry Act. Another desirable requirement for the sector at large is a private sector element which has strong orientation towards sound, progressive and constructive business practices of engagement, capable of working on and taking up available opportunities for sustainability under the Act. At this stage it seems that private enterprise has not yet fully embraced and become engaged in this, and as there is little progress on the sustainability front, there appears to be a general absence of a career stream for foresters in private enterprise at this point. This could however develop with a demand from resource owning entities seeking to hire field expertise as they mature, and with the hoped-for development of Emission Trading Scheme opportunities over time.

Should such ETS schemes evolve, PNG is structurally well placed for involvement, and will bring a new level of demand for field services in forestry.

To date the jury is still out on some aspects of sectoral development in the public and private enterprise areas. This will continue to evolve into the future and warrants and will require sound and strong progressive management to succeed, on both sides of the fence.

Considerations for now and the Future I would like to make some comment on a variety of issues, as I see them: 5

PNG’s Forest Sector is important to Economic Development.

•

The PNG Forest industry sector is dominated by foreign investment. The strength of the sector has been able to withstand the pressures of the financial crises of the late 1990’s and the more recent global financial crisis. The world economy may be headed for further hiccups, however PNG is in as sound a position as any to bounce through, if markets for the nation’s products hold firm.

•

While PNG has a pressing need to maintain a strong diversified foreign investment base, an additional objective lies in growing a national element in the commercial forestry sector. The Forest Industry Development Study of the early 1990’s suggested that the optimum long-term benefits to PNG would accrue where industry ownership and resource ownership were in the same hands. Perhaps there will be opportunities develop in this area through joint ventures, using the situation in Madang Province as an example, or as standalone activity such as at Open Bay. In both areas there has historically been a strong corporate orientation in forestry which has been conducive to their development.

•

The last 40 years has seen about a tenfold increase in the rate of harvest, and it likely still short of a sustainable figure if the right decisions are taken regarding forest management in the long term. However, reporting of late concerning Special Purpose Agricultural and Business Leases does nothing for my confidence that the forest resource base has a sustainable future, at least at current levels, should there be wholesale wastage of the resource base because of these SPABLs.

•

At the same time the population has grown by about a factor of 4, placing further pressure on the forest resource base from population growth, forest conversion and hopefully, in some cases, a renewable commercial/economic resource base.

•

This begs the question: what facet of “sustainability” are we focused on? Is it purely the level of sustainability of the resource base, or the capacity of commercial interests to continue to fund operations, or the capacity of Government to meaningly plan, administer and regulate the resource base in keeping with the Forest Act? I suggest each of these facets have widely diverging answers. It seems that the path chosen is towards a managed resource base, however the other two areas need urgent attention as well, not the least being capacity of the PNG Forest Authority to mobilize and manage as framed under the Act. It seems to me that balance is required but currently in short supply.

•

Renewable forest resources are the most socially significant resource of the nation, apart from its land. The current Forest Act includes imperatives for forest management in the national interest, however little if anything has spilled over into practical application under Forest Management Agreements and associated Project Agreements.

For example, where are the forest management principles and targets in FMAs and how will they be achieved? How will the forest sector contribute to a sustainable sectoral economy in the future if the resource base erodes?

Forests and their use

•

Professionalism, good science, good corporate and public governance and a balance between short term environmental disturbance and accrued returns to PNG are required if there is to be a long-term future for the forest resource base.

6

•

Except for relatively small-scale plantation activity, all that has so far been practiced is basically to leave the logged forest areas in a condition of “benign neglect” or convert them to some other land use as required for subsistence or other purposes. There has been no general proactive move to developing “forest management” as such. Time is on the forester’s side: we do not expect to see “instant forests”, and understand better than most, the need for balanced land use planning in the longer term if the resource base is to be maintained into the future.

•

A potentially significant area which has been languishing without any focus has been “other forest produce”, or minor forest products. There have been casual economic opportunities for seed collection, sandalwood, eaglewood, and potentially other products and extractives. I look forward to the Paper by Professor Topul Rali in this regard. His expertise and focus may well provide a direction for a framework for development of some minor forest products activities which have potential as economic generators at a commercial and/or an economic and local level. Further research studies into utility minor forest products and ethnological medical practices may further indicate opportunities for specialized extractives which could be developed over time.

•

Forest resource owners, forest operators, forest administrators and field foresters need to work collectively or in concert to secure a sound future. Favour one over others and the system falls into imbalance, with potentially serious social, commercial, economic, and environmental consequences.

•

The resource grab evidenced under the Special Agricultural and Business Leases cannot be permitted to avoid regulatory requirements under the Forest Act regarding planning, monitoring and appropriate regulation. It would be better if they did not exist, but should they hold under law, “in the National interest”, they should be regulated stringently regarding forest operational performance, planning, and defined and regulated post logging land use performance, and under severe penalty.

•

There is room and pressing need for improvement in the application of forest practice, administration, and operational performance. Debate on the sector will not simply “go away” and must reach timely resolution before optimum results on the ground for the long-term sectoral future in PNG are achieved. Less than this will see further dissipation and loss of opportunity, and all elements of the sector must carry their fair share of the load.

•

There will continue to be a need for “forestry” in PNG if there is demand for the products of the forest. These might be any mix of commercial, economic, social, environmental, or other values.

Integrating the Trees with the Forest

•

Some people cannot see the forest for the trees, and I would also add that some cannot see the trees for the forest. It is the task of foresters to see all the trees as well as the whole of the forest, and this is not always easy where there are conflicting pressures.

•

I get the sense that foresters have not had a good run for a long time. Let us go back, say to the early 1970s. Then, the lot of the forester was largely directed towards defining the size and shape of operable forests across PNG, expanding existing plantations, the main ones being at Kerevat (mainly teak and kamarere), Bulolo 7

(hoop and klinkii pine) and Brown River/Kuriva (teak), monitoring existing Timber Permit operations (limited log export operations and numerous sawmills), and extending the frontiers of knowledge about minor forest products, timber technology and use, carrying out botanical research, and generally keeping close to the resource owners and operators in the areas then under operation. Preparing for the future took up a great deal of energy and application, and the Department of Forests at that time was internationally recognized for its technical competence and progressive outlook.

•

Between 1970 and 1980, about one quarter of the professional man-years of experience present at the start, were carrying four times the workload by the end of the period. This situation occurred through the advent of mainstream log export operations and the loss of overseas professional staff during that period.

•

Now, some 30 years later, the professional and technical workforce would be under much more pressure, with harvest levels much higher than 1980, more widespread and more complex in their administration and management. If this is the case, the PNG Forest Authority today must be drastically under-resourced in terms of staff numbers, equipment, facilities, and the means of fulfilling its tasks, and I have the feeling that it must spend a lot of time playing a “catch-up” game. There appears to also be a regional imbalance of field staffing and production monitoring levels.

Hence the emphasis on capacity development in the National Forest Development Guidelines of 2010.

•

Today the game is changing quickly. Today, it can be argued that few operations, if any, are based on a sustainable criterion, and the “showcase” State plantations of yesteryear are either no longer in existence, having been the subject of log export harvesting, or likely under operation in excess of sustainability thresholds.

•

At about the time that the Commission of Inquiry into the Forest Industries Council (and related matters) released its findings, and new Forest Policy was being debated, the NFCAP exercise (National Forest and Conservation Action Plan, from memory a UNDP sponsored project) was initiated, in an attempt to “plug the gaps” perceived in the public administration of the forest sector, through the strengthening of the then Department of Forests.

•

The NFCAP attempts at institutional strengthening, and resuscitation of the field leadership and regulatory role of government forestry officers failed to achieve the desired results. When the World Bank’s engagement developed, it took over and extended the NFCAP’s strengthening attempts into the form of the Forestry and Conservation Programme, with endorsement and approval of the Government at the time.

•

Productive communication and positive interaction were not always evident in the later World Bank’s efforts to secure and maintain a stable association with PNG, and there was extreme reaction from foreign investors intent on averting a superior position by the Bank in forest resource matters. The Bank’s final report card 8

indicated it felt that the forestry sector in PNG was “beyond salvation”, however through efforts of the PNGFA, commercial strength of sector investors, and sustained resource access it has survived, at least up to the present. It has the potential to grow but needs astute management across the board to achieve this.

•

Initially however, operators had shown little or no enthusiasm for the sustainability fundamentals of the Forest Policy, and foresters were largely marginalized in all this. It seems that the public forestry sector management system is hard pressed to keep up with day-to-day requirements, including adequate proactive planning and logistical preparation for the growth potential for the sector.

•

An old saying is that if you do not know where you are going, any road might get you there, but you could get lost on the way. Is a haphazard future going to be the reality for PNG’s forests, or will there be improvements through application of the NFDGs and evolving field practices? As a forester I am optimistic, subject to enabling processes being in place.

•

The lack of capacity within the system was foreseen in 2001, and a “Forest TimeBound Action Plan”, was approved by the NEC. I understand part of this Plan was to examine the possible separation of planning and operational monitoring functions, presumably handling planning in a proactive manner, and perhaps even taking new project areas fully to start-up stage before handing field operational monitoring to the National Forest Service. Much of what was outlined in the Plan had merit but languished through lack of capacity and follow through. There perhaps was some thought that functional separation in this way would enable the “trees” and the “forests” to be both fairly treated in the development of new operations. This has not yet been tested.

•

It seems that the current actual annual harvest is apparently lower than what was initially accepted as “sustainable” by the National Forest Board. There is, on paper, room to expand the sector within the accepted limits of sustainability. On-going review of sustainable rates of harvest is needed, because of changes to the resource base, either natural or man-made.

•

The National Forest Policy says much about sustainability, development of national enterprise, expansion of the investment base, a processing direction, and gives a roadmap for resource mobilization under viable conditions of sustainability and environmental responsibility.

•

The mainstream forest industry operators, however, generally perceived, are essentially there because of their strength and experience, much like the main players in the mining sector. That they are law abiding and adhere to policy directives is anticipated, but not guaranteed, and close monitoring and regulation is required under the Act. The Corporate Plan of the PNG Forest Authority keeps this in focus and there is need to develop a corporate approach to sustainability, and industry regulation which is evident and on-going.

9

•

I believe the will is there amongst foresters and genuine “forest” oriented people to achieve the goal of wise use and conservation of forest resources as set out under legislation, and hopefully the “trees” people will see a shared benefit in embracing practices and commercial policies which will be complementary to the long-term management of the forest. This will produce a resource base which in the end, will be the source of the next cycle of timber for harvest. This is part of what “sustainability” is about. The scope for this lies within the National Forest Policy and Legislation and is waiting for mobilization under conditions of commercial viability and economic, social, and environmental responsibility.

•

It seems that some significant aspects of Policy need a shot in the arm, and mechanics improved to round out performance to the level at which it could be. I see a serious social dilemma facing the nation in the long term if there is no balance between the “tree” and “forest” perceptions of the sector over time. The resource owners want and deserve more than being on a cycle of what could be called subsistence poverty: a subsistence economy without the resources or access to services to develop an improved sustainable quality of life, based on collective ownership of commercial forest resources.

•

Those who will bear the brunt of any long-term imbalance will be the resource owners dependent on and resident in the resource areas, and their future generations. The sector is capable of better than that, and the nation deserves better for and from the forest, its most widely spread natural resource.

The Forest Sector: Is this as good as it gets?

•

Do we have answers for all the pressing questions facing forestry in PNG? The answer is a definite “No”. But we do know enough to ask the right questions, and foresters should continue to ask them and seek answers.

•

The PNG Forest Authority has set out the fundamental principles of its operation: o Management, development, and protection of the nation’s forest resources and environment. o Maximization of PNG participation in resource development as a renewable asset. o Utilization of resources to achieve economic growth and sectoral development. o The encouragement of scientific study and research consistent with national development objectives o Increased education and training in skills, knowledge, and information in forestry o Effective strategies for management of forest resources and national, provincial, and local interests.

10

•

How does actual performance measure up to these basic principles? Are adequate resources made available to the Forest Authority to effectively manage its responsibilities? Is the investment element of the sector doing its bit, or being effectively guided in that direction? Is PNG getting full and fair value from its forest resources?

•

The transitional reforms on which forestry in PNG embarked in 1991 were fashioned from a philosophy of structural improvement which gave rise to the National Forest Policy which was translated into strategies to mobilize implementation. This has been an evolution which continues. The National Forest Policy, National Forest Development Guidelines and Corporate Plan of the PNG Forest Authority should be kept in focus so that progress is developed and continued. The framework remains intact but needs adequate resources to develop.

•

The litmus test for the future will be the degree of engagement by the three main parties, i.e., the State, traditional resource owners, and forest industry investors/operators. By and large this engagement will provide a structural springboard for further reforms, which will include: o Regulatory and administrative reforms which are structural, complex, and long term. o Private sector reforms which are commercially and structurally sound. o Resource owner reforms which are conducive to sustainability of the resource base. o And the 2 parties with the greatest inherent direct interest in success, the traditional owners, and operators, need both to be aware not only of their rights and privileges, but also their respective obligations and responsibilities for the maintenance and growth of the sector. The forest sector may then have a sustainable future.

•

Sustainable operations result from sustained access to sustained resource and markets.

To facilitate these conditions, a competent and adequately resourced professional, regulatory, and administrative and management entity of the PNGFA is required to fulfil the fundamental principles set out in Policy and Legislation. I have no doubt that these are the objectives of the National Forest Development Guidelines and the Corporate Plan for the PNGFA.

•

The fundamental question is having the lack of implementation of provisions of Forest Policy been the result of incapacity of the regulatory arm to fulfil its role, or from a private investment element apparently reluctant to move with the developmental principles of the National Forest Policy?

•

If the current situation is as good as it gets, it seems that everyone on board will be in for a rough ride into an uncertain future. This does not prepare the ground for sustainability in the sector.

Considerations for Processing •

A close examination of the National Policy on Downstream Processing of Forest Products of 2005 is warranted, with review if necessary. A single common thread comes from all earlier documents on this subject: it must be market driven from the outset.

11

•

As Government revenues flow from other resource fields (particularly LNG projects), less pressure will be exerted on forest resources as an immediate income earner, and more balance for growing rural economies over time could develop. Under this scenario there may also be more opportunity to develop processing activity through incentive means.

•

State agencies have a role in promoting transparency in the marketplace. There is a great gulf between selling timber and marketing processed timber product lines. There is currently a lot of timber selling, with little marketing evident. It is not only those species which will sell themselves -- Taun, rosewood, kwila etc – but the “lesser-known species” which warrant the promotional work, the research and development of market opportunities.

•

To safely embark into serious downstream processing there are several components which must exist: o sustained access to sustained resources o appropriate market driven product development o secure, sustainable markets o adequate technical skills to maintain production standards.

•

Any entity seeking to seriously embrace a move to 100% processing must have the right answers to the following questions: o Is the resource base suitable, sufficient, and secure? o Is the product demand sustainable and the market secure? o Are product quality and product flow/regular adequate supply manageable? o Are workforce skill levels available and consistent? o Are supply chain logistics sound and manageable?

•

It is likely that entities interested in seriously exploring processing opportunities would be on the larger production end of scale, or have a “captured market”, and be able to identify sound commercial reasons, including long-term planning objectives and available incentives.

•

Industries are built through building markets, not just factories, and it is likely that those private enterprise agencies which are in the best position to engage a processing policy will be those with significant leverage in the marketplace.

•

It may be that balanced outcomes might be generated through evaluation of individual proposals on merit, targeting export-oriented markets. An evaluation into appropriate processing levels for individual project areas would be logical, given different parameters in resource areas and market potential, with potential investors assessed on strengths and weaknesses of processing proposals.

•

A blanket approach for processing is fraught with dangers and as it not possible to legislate success, the investor must carefully evaluate the viability and security of the resource base, production costs and market access and security.

Into the Future: The Challenges of Good Forest Practice in Papua New Guinea

12

•

The forest resources of PNG are not public forests, and are privately owned, and unless and until this becomes part of a forest management ethic and practice, it is difficult to anticipate achievement of long-term goals of forest management and resource base security. Forest Management Agreement conditions go part of the way, but these mechanisms need to be properly mobilized and promoted into real application over time.

•

A holistic approach is recommended for resource base security and maintenance, from initial forest inventory and planning to monitoring and analysis of market development and product flows. Adequate and viable land use planning will provide a springboard for sustainability of the resource base if that is the chosen option.

•

The capacity for this will develop over time and will likely be assisted greatly when revenue flows develop from particularly the LNG projects. This will also present opportunities for greater processing of raw forest products where incentives might be made available.

•

To develop the sector, it will be necessary to embed resources, personnel and practices which will cover: o Development of administrative and management infrastructure at national, provincial, and local level. o Adequate planning infrastructure. o Market access and development – analysis, feedback, trade liaison. o Minor forest products – research and development. o Plantations – a real approach. o Development of National enterprises. o Demographic projections and land use requirements and mobilization.

•

There has been a continuing divergence of commercial and economic values, and these must be engineered to converge for full development of the forestry potential of PNG to develop.

•

Therefore, the future holds the opportunity for consolidation of all aspects of “forestry” in PNG, from private enterprise and government agencies alike. The past 40 years have been directed towards planning and establishment of a contemporary industry, and the next 40 will be directed towards further transition, planning and consolidation in both public and private sectors.

•

No doubt there will be social, economic, commercial, administrative and management concerns in the next 40 years, just as there has been in the last. Historically these have not presented terminal obstacles to “forestry” in Papua New Guinea, and I cannot imagine this will occur in the future.

•

In the end, though, the scale, shape, and effect of the forestry sector in Papua New Guinea will be the one it deserves, having evolved because of the interaction between resource owner groups, government, and private enterprise.

•

If constructive interaction exists and the right choices are made, it should be a bright future, however I feel there remain many challenges which could disaffect a sound future if not actively managed in the national interest.

13

Bibliography Jim Belford James David “Jim” Belford joined TPNG Forests on 27th March 1970. His occupation was as a forest officer (B.Sc. For. ANU 1967), after completion of his Australian National Service commitment as a Second Lieutenant in 1968 and 1969.

Overall, he has had a long and ongoing involvement as a general industry advocate, with proactive development and implementation activity in ongoing strategic development project planning including policy/legislative input/industry representation to National Forest Board level in the period 1987-1997. Since then, he has undertaken private consultancy and continuing policy input to 2010. Although now relocated to Brisbane he continues to have a family/business activity base in PNG and commutes when necessary.

Work Activities. In 1970 Jim was attached to the Headquarters Survey group undertaking the Vanimo and Gogol surveys with over 100 field staff and two helicopters.

In 1971, he undertook the Kuriva survey, relieving OIC Wau plantations, forest management officer Lae mainly Morobe Province including Markham Valley and Morobe Coast. He was active in all field forest management monitoring and TRP field work. He co-ordinated field work for DIES film promotion of DoF field activities; Ioma 4 TRP field work, Buhem-Mongi, Gumi, Oomsis and Morobe. He was a member of PNGVR 2i/c (A/Capt.) Lae until closure after self-government.

In 1972/73 Regional Forest Management Officer undertaking in depth forest management and industry monitoring role; Wau forests fires co-ordination with Army contingent and radio communications with field crew and support. Carriage of field work for Landsat Ground control Morobe and West New Britain Provinces. Recce of Manus forest potential and preparation of contingency planning for field surveys of Manus, Siassi Island and Cromwell Mountains. Continuation of Regional Forest Management duties. Posted to Vanimo as District Forester for possible Parsons and Whittemore involvement in the Vanimo Timber Area. Carriage of resource inventory of Manus, Siassi and Cromwell Mt. Forest Areas with 50 field staff and helicopter support.

1975/76/77 Posting as Regional Forest Officer Lae. All field, administrative and management responsibility within the Region. 1977 Appointed Principal Management Officer at Forest HQ under Neil Brightwell. Responsible for all field activity, harvesting, operational budgets, industry monitoring, operations, and resource development in PNG. Provincial Forest Offices created in 1978 onwards with advent of Provincial Government. Ongoing role re policy input and field administration.

Jim resigned from Forests at the end of 1981 to take up a position of Resource Operations Manager PNG Forest Products and as the PNGFIA Secretary. He has remained in private enterprise activity in PNG including policy development and industry advocate/representative duties such as restructuring the PNGFIA to assimilate into the requirements of the Forest Act 1992. Other field activities include assignments in Central, Gulf, Western, Manus and Milne Bay Provinces. Jim has never really left PNG. 14

ACRONYMS ACT ACIAR ACLMP AEC AFS AFPNG AIF AMF ANBG ANGAU ANU APMF APPM ASIO ASOPA AusAID BA BCOF “Beer Time” BFC BGD BUC C cm CALM

Australian Capital Territory Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research AusAid funded World Bank Land Mobilisation program.

Administrators Executive Committee Australian Forestry School Association of Foresters of PNG Australian Infantry Forces Australian Military Forces Australian National Botanical Gardens Australian New Guinea Administrative Unit Australian National University Australian Paper Manufacturers Forestry Pty Ltd Australia Paper and Pulp Manufacturers Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Australian School of Pacific Administration Australian Aid Agency basal area British Commonwealth Occupational Force 1945-52 Any time.

Bulolo Forestry College Bulolo Gold Dredging Company Bulolo University College Commonwealth Centimetre Western Australian Department of Conservation and Land Management CFA Commonwealth Forestry Association CNGT Commonwealth New Guinea Timbers Bulolo CRE Commander Royal Engineers CRE CRE is a term inherited by RAE from RE and is the term for the Commanding Officer of a RAE unit which is headed by a Lt Col. Although the officer is called the CRE the name is also used for the name of his unit.

E.g., CRE Aust Forestry Group or 1(NG Forests).

CSIRO Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation CHAH Council of Heads of Australasian Herbaria DASF Dept of Agriculture, Stock and Fisheries DBH/ dbh Diameter at breast height DEPT Department DPI Department of Primary Industry DOF Department of Forests e.g.

For example Etc et cetera (more of the same) FAO Food and Agriculture Organisation F &TB Forest and Timber Bureau Canberra FIM Forest Information System FPRC Forest Products Research Centre Hohola 15

FRI Forkol GAB Gbhob Gubab GIS ha IBRD IFA IFY ITTO JICA L of N LRRS m3 MM NAA NARI NB NFCAP no.

NG NGF NGIB NGO NGVR NZ NSW NTSC OISCA P or p PIB PIR PNG PNGAA PNGAF PNGFA PNGFIA PNGRIS PNGUT POM Q QF RAE RPC RRA SFM SP UK

Forest Research Institute Lae Bulolo Forestry College Girth above buttress Girth breast height over bark Girth under bark above buttress Geographic Information Systems Hectare International Bank for Reconstruction and Development Institute of Foresters of Australia International Year of the Forest International Tropical Timber Organization Japanese International Cooperation Agency League of Nations Land Resource Soils Survey (branch of CSIRO) cubic metre Military Medal National Archives Australia National Agriculture Research Institute New Britain PNG National Forestry and Conservation Action Plan Number New Guinea New Guinea Forces (relates to plant collection of Lae Herbarium) New Guinea Infantry Battalion Non-Government Organisation New Guinea Volunteer Rifles New Zealand New South Wales National Tree Seed Centre PNG Bulolo Organisation for Industrial, Spiritual and Cultural Advancement International Japan. page Papuan Infantry Battalion Pacific Islands Regiment Papua New Guinea Papua New Guinea Australia Association Papua New Guinea Australian Foresters Magazine Series Papua New Guinea Forest Authority PNG Forest Industries Association Papua New Guinea Resource Information System PNG University of Technology Port Moresby Queensland Queensland Forestry Royal Australian Engineers/Australian Army Royal Papuan Constabulary Rapid Resource Appraisal Sustainable Forest Management South Pacific United Kingdom 16

UN Unasylva UNE UNEP UNI UNITECH UNRE UPNG UQ US USA TPNG TUBL TA TA TRP Vol VSF WA WB

United Nations Journal of FAO of UN University of New England Armidale NSW United Nations Environment Program University University of Technology Lae PNG University of Natural Resources and Environment University of Papua New Guinea University of Queensland United States United States of America Territory of Papua and New Guinea Territory United Brewery Ltd Timber Area Timber Authority Timber Rights Purchase volume Victorian School of Forestry Western Australia World Bank

17