…hence their applications for additional forest concessions denied

THE Guyana Forestry Commission (GFC) has refuted statements by a group of persons who protested in front of the Kwakwani Logging Station on Monday, alleging that the commission had treated them unfairly with regard to the awarding of forest concessions.

In a response to the protest action, the GFC in a press statement, on Tuesday, stated that unconfirmed reports have identified the protestors as representatives from Aroaima Forest & Agriculture Producers Association (AFAPA) and Upper Berbice Forest & Agricultural Producers Association (UBFAPA).

“It was suggested by the named Associations that the GFC treated them unfairly by not awarding named forest concessions to them. This is furthest from the truth…Firstly, Section 6 (4 & 5) of the Forest Act 2009, mandates the GFC to carefully evaluate the technical and financial qualifications, as well as the compliance history of every applicant; to satisfy itself that the said applicant (a) intends in good faith to fulfill the forest concession agreement and (b) has the competence and resources to carry out the type of operations specified in that agreement,” the Commission said.

It noted that in addition to the foregoing, Regulation 8(2) of the Forest Regulations 2018 stipulates that no forest concession agreement may be granted unless all outstanding fees have been paid or assured to the GFC. “Regrettably, some associations have been unable to meet the statutory qualifications set out above,” the statement said.

The GFC said that it advertised a detailed list of criteria for consideration highlighting for example, that all outstanding sums due and owing to the GFC must be cleared prior to or at the date of the application(s) in order for the said application(s) to be considered.

“Notwithstanding indebtedness of the named associations, the GFC did not weigh these debts heavily against them, since they were both signatories to Memorandums of Understanding with the GFC for the said sums. However, the GFC could not look past the numerous breaches of the Forest Act over the lifetime of the concessions, neither could it ignore the fact that UBAFAPA controlled eighteen (18) concessions including three large concessions. The GFC was of the opinion that UBAFPA needed to strengthen their management capacities to properly manage the concessions already awarded to them, before they could be favourably considered for additional concessions,” the GFC stated.

To this end, the GFC and the Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF) Secretariat have been working collectively to strengthen the human capacities within these bodies. In fact, a number of workshops were hosted by the FCPF and the named associations along with several others were in attendance, the GFC said.

The statement said that as regards AFAPA, this association failed to submit any supporting documents (with its application) to satisfy the GFC of its competency and or adequacy of resources to carry out another forest operation.

“Therefore, and in light of the foregoing, the GFC was of the opinion that at the time of application, neither of the named associations satisfied the GFC of their respective qualifications (financial and otherwise) to carry out an additional forest operation in good faith,” the GFC said.

The statement noted that the forest resources of Guyana are an important component of the nation’s patrimony which must be used for the benefit of all citizens. “These forests provide many goods and services especially for Indigenous and forest-dependent communities which include not only timber, but plants for medicinal purposes, food for wildlife that inhabit the forest and fresh water for all,” it said.

“The GFC will continue to engage and work with all associations to strengthen their respective capacities so that they can both manage concessions already in hand, as well as any they may qualify for in the near future,” the statement concluded.