Day 293 - 04 Nov 96 - Page 28


     
     1        using the word "keep" because it is the ----
     2
     3   MR. JUSTICE BELL:   I have to decide what I make of that.  I
     4        understand what your argument is.
     5
     6   MR. MORRIS:   The point is, the most important question is the
     7        reality, and I think that it is in the interests of the
     8        public, it is the reality that is served best by this court
     9        case.  The reality is Mr. Rampton accepted the forest cover
    10        argument on page 2, line 46, day 58, we say.  Certainly the
    11        experts accepted it, anyway.
    12
    13   MR. JUSTICE BELL:   What he accepted is that you need a much
    14        greater area of forest than the actual area chopped down in
    15        order to provide that same amount of timber without letting
    16        the forest suffer, or suffer in a way which even the timber
    17        industry would accept.  What he did not accept was that
    18        that is what the leaflet -----
    19
    20   MR. MORRIS:   I understand that.
    21
    22   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  ---- would be saying to the ordinary reader.
    23
    24   MR. MORRIS:   Yes.  I did not say that is what he said.
    25
    26   MR. RAMPTON:   Nor does he accept, if that is what the leaflet
    27        had said, that it would be defamatory.
    28
    29   MR. JUSTICE BELL:   No.
    30
    31   MR. MORRIS:   I am sure Mr. Rampton will ----
    32
    33   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  What I need you to do, granted that you say
    34        that the leaflet means sustainable area rather than area
    35        chopped down in any given year, is how you say I should
    36        calculate the area, if that is the point you want to make.
    37
    38   MR. MORRIS:   Yes.  Well, all I am saying is that these
    39        arguments are, I believe, now accepted on all sides, that
    40        particular argument.
    41
    42        Now, on page 4 of Mr. Mallinson's evidence on that day, he
    43        moved on to the forest cycle estimate and then by that time
    44        it was 80 to a hundred years, 80 for Scotland, but then he
    45        began to introduce a 40 for southern Scotland, so it was
    46        not clear, and also it later became further unclear,
    47        because in fact in the Iggesund mill Mr. Mallinson later
    48        accepted was likely to be taking raw material in northern
    49        Scotland which had a longer cycle, the 80 year cycle.  That
    50        is on the bottom of page 50, top of page 51.  That is in 
    51        fact from the flow country, which had been recognised to be 
    52        a sort of environmental disaster area because of its usage 
    53        as plantation planting.
    54
    55        So we have something where, by Mr. Mallinson's evidence, 40
    56        and/or 80 year cycle or both for Scotland, but, in any
    57        case, we have heard that the hundred year cycle, which is
    58        in the document sent by the Enso-Gutzeit mill or the
    59        company, said they had a hundred year cycle and we have
    60        heard that Enso-Gutzeit ----

Prev Next Index