Day 056 - 28 Nov 94 - Page 41


     
     1        cycle of 100 years, each year you could only cut, actually
     2        fell, one per cent of it, could you not, on average or it
     3        just would not regenerate; is that correct?
     4        A.  Well, that is logic.
     5
     6   Q.   That would be a reasonable assumption, would it?
     7        A.  That would be a basic mathematical starting point.
     8
     9   Q.   So, in order to continue felling, you would need a forest
    10        area approximately -- it follows from what I have said --
    11        100 times the size of what you are actually cutting in
    12        order for it to regenerate if it has a life of 100 years?
    13        A.  Again, the mathematical approach to this one is that if
    14        you take a single hectare out for any reason, and you have
    15        100 hectares, then if you are doing one a year, in 100
    16        years the regeneration should have given you that first
    17        hectare now 100 years of age.
    18
    19   Q.   If you take it on the thinnings, if you make the
    20        calculation on the basis of the thinnings -- I cannot work
    21        out what the actual total volume of the wood because,
    22        obviously, it is very difficult on thinnings -- whatever
    23        volume of that wood would be that you got out from
    24        thinnings, that would still take a wood of the full size in
    25        order to be able to make those thinnings that we
    26        calculated?
    27        A.  What I have tried do in the evidence I
    28        have presented  -----
    29
    30   Q.   I am not criticising your evidence.
    31        A.  No, no.  What I am trying to do is trying to help us
    32        through to this point where it might be relevant even in
    33        Finland, was to take a forest which is not so very
    34        different (and that is the one in the south of Scotland
    35        which grows on a similar pattern to that in Finland and
    36        Sweden) and try to show that the actual product that goes
    37        to make packaging material comes from both clearing an area
    38        and thinning an area and, as a consequence, it is
    39        improbable that any mill is only taking cleared area for
    40        its raw material, and it is improbable that it is only
    41        taking thinned forest for its raw material.
    42
    43   Q.   Right.
    44        A.  In the case of Enso-Gutzeit, I happen to actually have
    45        been to the mill that Enso-Gutzeit are writing about here,
    46        and I have been to the forests which are supplying that
    47        mill, and that mill is a significant supplier to
    48        McDonald's. So, I am very happy to answer any question
    49        either related to Finland and Enso-Gutzeit and McDonald's,
    50        or the one that I have shown in my evidence which I have 
    51        given on the basis of a south Scotland one which supplies 
    52        another operation which makes packaging for McDonald's. 
    53
    54   Q.   On the south Scotland one, just for interest, what would be
    55        the forest cycle that is based upon?
    56        A.  The overall cycle?
    57
    58   Q.   Yes, well, in Finland the persons that estimated it as 100
    59        years, what would be similar estimation for the Scottish
    60        example you gave?

Prev Next Index