Woodmark Forest Certification Public Report

Forest Manager/Owner: Forest name: Region and Country Certificate Code: Date of main assessment Woodmark Inspector(s) Report author Report checked by Report approved by Date of main assessment report Date of certificate issue Date of expiry of certificate Date report last updated

Iwokrama Timber Incorporated Iwokrama Forest Guyana, South America SA-FM/COC-001805 9th - 15th September 2007 Vanessa Benn, Dr. Michael Scott, Kevin Jones Vanessa Benn, Dr. Michael Scott, Kevin Jones Kevin Jones Soil Association Certification Ltd. 11-Jan-08 11-Jan-08 10-Jan-13 12/20/2009

Please note that the main text of this report is publicly available on request Woodmark South Plaza Marlborough Street Bristol BS1 3NX United Kingdom Telephone (+44) (0) 117 914 2435 Fax (+44) (0) 117 314 5001 Email wm@soilassocation.org www/soilassociation.org/forestry
Soil Association Certification Ltd Company Registration No. 726903 A wholly-owned subsidiary of the Soil Association Charity No. 20686

RT-FM-001-02 March 2005. prepared by EcoSylva Ltd on behalf of Soil Association Certification Ltd

1 1.1 1.1.1 1.2 1.2.1 1.2.2 1.2.3

BASIC INFORMATION Certification Body Certificate registration code Details of forest manager/owner Company name Contact person Business address Soil Association Woodmark SA-FM/COC-001805

1.2.4 1.2.5 1.2.5

Tel Fax e-mail

Iwokrama Timber Inc. Dane Gobin, Raquel Thomas Iwokrama International Centre, 77 High Street, Georgetown, Guyana. South America. (592) 225-1504, 225-1181, 225-1186, 226-7388 Fax: (592) 225-9199 dgobin@iwokrama.org, rthomas@iwokrama.org

1.3 1.3.1 1.3.2 1.3.3 1.3.4 1.3.5 1.3.6 1.3.7 1.3.8 1.3.9 1.4 1.4.1

Scope of certificate Type of certificate Name(s) of the forest covered by the certificate Number of FMUs Country Region Latitude Longitude Hemisphere Forest Zone or Biome FSC AAF category/ies Forest Management Tenure Private (ha) State (ha) Community (ha) Type of enterprise

Single Iwokrama Forest 1 Guyana Iwokrama 58 deg, 50 min W 4 deg, 15 min N North Tropical Tropical

371,681 0 21,951 Private (International Organisation) created by act of Parliament 72 108 371,681 0 Broad Leaved Not Applicable Multispecies see Annex 3 187,175 (Sustainable use area) 108,992 (Net operable area) 184,506 (Wilderness Preserve) 371,681 Rare and Endangered Species, High Concentration of Biodiversity, Community need and cultural Identity - Indigenous Peoples Cultural and Historic Sites, Basic services - watershed protection, Research Sites

1.4.2 1.4.3 1.4.4 1.4.5a 1.4.5b 1.4.6 1.4.7 1.4.8 1.4.9 1.4.10 1.4.11 1.4.12

Number of workers Employees Contractors/Community/other workers Total area (hectares) Forest type Plantation area (ha) Forest type Semi-Natural area (ha) Forest Composition Plantation species category Principal Species Production forest (area) Protected forest (area) High Conservation Value Forest (ha) HCVF Values present

1.4.13 1.4.14 1.4.15 1.4.16 1.4.17 1.4.18

Non Timber Products or Services (area in ha) Area restocked by replanting (ha) Area restocked by natural regeneration (ha) Annual allowable cut (cu.m.yr) Actual annual production (cu.m.yr). Year 2007 projected. Product categories

371,681 0 108,992 40000 (theoretical) 20000 (approved by board) Round wood / Sawlogs / Sawn wood. Non timber products not included in scope. At stump No No No Number Area

1.4.19 1.4.20 1.4.22 1.4.23 1.4.22

Point of sale Pilot Project SLIMFs - Small SLIMFs - Low intensity Division of FMUs Less than 100 ha 100 ha 1000 ha 1000 ha 10,000 ha More than 10,000 ha Total

371 681

1.4.24

Area of forest owned/managed but excluded from scope of certification Name Area 0

1.5 Date

SUMMARY OF ASSESSMENT HISTORY Assessment # Conditions issued

# Conditions closed n/a

Sep-05 Sep-07 29-Nov-07 Jan-08 25-30Jan09 30-Mar-09 31-Mar-09 28-Dec-10

Pre-Assessment Main Assessment First draft report to client & peer review Report finalised First surveillance First draft report sent to client Report finalised CAR review finalised Second surveillance First draft report sent to client Report finalised Third surveillance First draft report sent to client Report finalised Fourth surveillance First draft report sent to client Report finalised

n/a 18 draft 25

10

4 40

No.

Std ref S1 1.1

Iwokrama - SA-FM/COC-001805 Observation or Non-compliance

Grade

Corrective action

Deadline

2007.1

Note dates of observations are based on the January surveillance, CAR close out/deadlines are based upon the March date of the finalised report. Legal entity. There are inconsistencies with regard to the Minor raised Forest managers shall clarify and 6 months Note 6 legal entity responsible for forest management planning, to Major ensure consistency with regard to month deadline given implementation and monitoring; compliance with FSC March 2009 the legal entity responsible for forest to allow sufficient requirements; and compliance with national legal and management. time for consideration administrative requirements. and action by the International Board.

2007.2

1.1

Compliance with legal and administrative requirements. Minor raised Anomalies were noted in relation to application of and to Major compliance with national legal administrative March 2009 requirements.

Forest managers shall ensure compliance with national and local laws and administrative requirements related to forest management.

3 months

2007.3

2.1

Area of Iwokrama forest. Iwokrama are able to Rec demonstrate clear evidence of tenure, however, there is a discepancy between the approximate area given in the Iwokrama Act and the precise area provided by Iwokrama survey and mapping. There would be merit in Iwokrama verifying the precise area and boundary locations with appropriate authorities, including Guyana Lands and Survey Commission, in order to avoid any future issues arising in relation to land title Fairview tenure. There is clear tenure for the Fairview Minor raised Community within the Iwokrama forest area and this is to Major clearly and formally recognised by Iwokrama. The change March 2009 in tenure could have implications in relation to permissions and licences. There would be merit in Iwokrama verifying the status of existing permissions and licences with appropriate authorities in order to avoid any future issues arising in relation to these.

Forest Managers should verify the n/a precise area and boundary locations of the forest with appropriate authorities.

2007.4

1.1/2.1

Forest Managers should verify the status of permissions and licences within the Fairview Title land with appropriate authorities.

3 months

2007.5

2.2

Community resources and free and informed consent. Within the wider community there is generally poor understanding of the economics of the timber operation and consequently a limited basis for the communities themselves to evaluate whether they are receiving appropriate payment for use of the forest resource.

Minor raised Forest managers shall ensure that to Major local communities delegate control March 2009 over forest operations and resources with free and informed consent. Including annual public meetings with community shareholders where annual accounts are explained and discussed. See also Rec 2007.37.

6 months Note 6 month deadline given based on communities own recognition of limitations in ther capacity to respond quickly

2007.6

2.3/7.2

Fairview management plan. Whilst there is a coMinor raised management agreement in place at Fairview and a to Major participatory approach taken to developing a management March 2009 plan, the plan itself is not yet complete.

Forest managers shall continue to 3 months work with the Fairview Community to complete the Fairview management plan.

2007.7

2.3/4.1/ 5.4

Provision of material to local community. Some product Rec from harvesting has been made available to the local commumity however comment was received that more could be done in this respect with regard to the material provided and the mannner in which it was delivered. There was no evidence that the local community was in a position to fulfill small orders for timber. Forest managers should assess of capacity of Fairview to make good use of the products and engage the community in discussion on the way forward on this issue

Forest managers should review provision of products from harvesting to the local community.

n/a

2007.8

4.1

Employment contracts. Employment terms and conditions Minor were generally good and in compliance with national and ILO requirements. However it was noted that employees/contractors are not given the explicit contractual right to voluntarily terminate their employment.

Forest managers shall review contracts for employees and contractors.

Next surveillance

2007.9

4.2

Health and safety management. Chainsaw operators did Minor raised not use all appropriate personal protective equipment to Major (protective trousers, boots, ear defenders absent), chainsaw March 2009 chain brake did not function correctly. There was no risk assessment. There was no clear effort made by site managers to correct this situation. There was no formal system for reporting accidents to senior managers. Code of Practice for Timber Harvesting was not fully complied with.

Forest managers shall meet or exceed all applicable laws and/or regulations covering health and safety of employees and their families.

3 months

2007.9 contd 4.2

Health and safety management.

2007.10.

5.1/5.3

Economic plans, monitoring, community benefit. There is Minor raised no clear work plan, budget or cost centre that clearly to Major identifies the operational costs of the forest operation March 2009 (5.1.1) and with social and environmental commitments identified under priciples 4 & 6 (5.1.5). The costs of research and monitoring attributable to the forest management enterprise are not clear. Those plans or budgets that do exist are not consistent and do not accurately reflect actual performance.

Forest managers shall clearly demonstrate how it is striving toward economic viability, while taking into account the full environmental, social, and operational costs of production.

3 months

2007.11

5.1/2.2

Economic plans & monitoring. In terms of social benefits at present the company will recieve about 6% of timber value cf FOB value Georgetown. This in turn limits the amount available for the community. Iwokrama aim to monitor financial inputs and outputs of the timber operation however there it is not clear that the current situation is economically viable, nor whether the division of value is equitable between the community and other stakeholders.

Minor raised Forest managers shall clearly 3 months to Major demonstrate how local communities March 2009 with legal or customary tenure or use rights shall maintain control, to the extent necessary to protect their rights or resources, over forest operations unless they delegate control with free and informed consent to other agencies. See also to CAR 2007.5.

2007.12

5.2

Local enterprises. There is good evidence of support and Minor development for local enterprises not using timber (eg Eco toursism, butterfly farming, fisheries) However forest managers are making only a very limited proportion of their timber production available to local enterprises and there are currently no locally controlled small-scale timber based industries or processing operations, in response to the demand as articulated by the local enterprises

Forest managers shall make a Next surveillance proportion of their timber production available to local enterprises such as locally controlled small-scale timber based industries or processing operations.

2007.13

5.3, 6.5

Selection of machinery. New 4 wheel drive agricultural Rec tractors were purchased for harvesting operations. These appear to have been purchased based on availability rather than suitability for purpose. No road/access construction/maintenance machinery was seen on site.

Forest managers should ensure n/a planning, organisation and application of appropriate technology are applied including choice of new harvesting, extraction and on site processing machinery.

2007.14

5.6

Post harvest analysis. Harvesting predicions are based on Minor raised detailed inventory and set within limits that are accepted to Major within Guyana. Harvesting plans are based on species March 2009 specific data. RIL harvesting is intended to minimise impact upon the forest. At present there is relatively little data about the growth and silvicultural response of the forest post harvesting. An issue of relevance in this respect is the long term response of key commercial species to harvesting eg Greenheart, Purpleheart. Research on this aspect elsewhere in Guyana is not conclusive but there is the possibility or likelihood that abundance of some species will reduce by the end of the cutting cycle. There are plans to collect data relating to forest response through post harvest inventory and monitoring to determine if further silvicultural interventions are necessary, however the methodology and implementation of this work and how it may be used to test or modify yield assumptions is not currently clear.

Forest managers should ensure that post harvest sampling and inventory be designed and implemented to allow for the testing of all assumptions regarding regeneration, growth, abundance, quality and size distribution of the main commercial species.

6 months Note 6 month deadline given to give consideration to the fact that harvesting has not yet been completed thus preventing post harvest inventory.

2007.14

5.6

Post harvest analysis contd.

2007.15

6.1

Site level environmental impact. The EIA Minor raised Environmental permit process of the government ensures to Major evaluation of environmental impact at the broad scale and March 2009 there are conditions attached to the permit in relation to monitoring compliance. Inventory and mapping data inform operations prior to their implementation however Iwokrama does not currently implement a systematic site level pre-operational assessment that identifies key values or constraints at the site level. Such a system could have particular relevance in the context of a joint venture partner implementing the most site disturbing operations.

Forest managers should implement 3 months a system to ensure that results of the assessment of impacts are taken account of in subsequent operations.

2007.15 contd

2007.16

6.2c

Monitoring and evaluation of hunting off take by local Rec raised to communities. There are systems in place to monitor Minor hunting and trade in wildlife species. However under the Amerindian Act and Iwokrama Act local Amerindian communities are permitted to hunt for subsistence purposes. There is no evidence to suggest that this presents a threat to animal or plant populations, however, there is no monitoring or evaluation of this aspect of local community activity and therefore no means by which to evaluate actual or potential impacts

Forest managers should review Next surveillance documented systems for controlling hunting, fishing, trapping and collecting of animals or plants.

2007.17

6.5a 6.5b Roads, extraction routes and protection of water Minor raised resources. The GFC Code of Practice for Timber to Major Harvesting provides guidelines for road construction, March 2009 crossing watercourses, log markets. This is supported by the RIL training courses and manuals. Iwokrama have adopted these guidelines. Implementation is currently being carried out by a joint venture partner. It is not clear how Iwokrama monitors implementation of the Code of Practice requirements nor how corrective action is ensured if required.

Forest managers shall ensure that 3 months written guidelines are implemented to: protect water resources; control erosion; minimise damage during road construction, and all other mechanical disturbances.

2007.18

6.6a

Chemical use. Currently there is no chemical pesticide use Rec raised to in the forest or as part of forest management which is Minor based on low impact harvesting and natural regeneration. Small amounts of chemical are used at the field centre and, there is the possibility that chemicals to protect or preserve timber could be used in the future. A basic system for recording chemical use, reason for use and alternatives considered has been developed though not yet fully implemented. Whilst overall risk is low there is scope to establish and implement a more robust system.

Forest managers should develop Next surveillance robust management systems that promote the development and adoption of environmentally friendly non-chemical methods of pest management and strive to avoid the use of chemical pesticides.

2007.19

6.6c/6.7

Fuel and chemical storage and transport. Stores were Minor raised inspected at field centre, ranger station, and fuel/oil to Major storage at harvest camp/site. Present stores do not appear March 2009 adequate, for example at the time of the assessment there were no bunding arrangements in place (though this is planned). Harvesting site management of fuels and oils did not appear to comply with Code of Practice for Timber Harvesting sections 7.2, 7.3, 7.4. (eg no bunding, use of handpumps for fuel, collection and disposal of containers). Occupational health and safety issues should be considered.

Forest managers shall ensure that 3 months proper equipment and training are provided to minimise health and environmental risks from chemicals, fuels and oils.

2007.20.

7.1a

Management Objectives. There are two key documents Minor raised Forest managers shall provide a containing Management Planning information "Iwokrama to Major clear statement of the objectives of Forest Forest Management Plan" and the "Environmental March 2009 forest management. and Forest Management Plan". The former covers the full range of activities of the centre and contains forest management detail. The status of this plan is not clear, it is not complete, and expires Dec 07. The latter focuses more on management aspects and specifies actions over the first five years of operations. A number of additional documents have also been prepared. These documents together are strong on overarching vision, governance and process, and provide detail on specific aspects of management, however, there is no clear and simple articulation of the objectives of forest management that indicate clearly what managers intend to achieve

3 months

2007.21

7.1f

Fire risk at camp. Fire risk is generally well evaluated in Rec raised to relation to the forest. However there may be fire risk Minor associated with build up of sawmill residue and offcuts at the mill site

Forest managers should ensure that Next surveillance the need for fire management and control has been evaluated and is documented at operational sites.

2007.21 contd

2007.22

7.2

Incorporation of monitoring into management plan Rec revision. Monitoring protocols have been recently revised, there will be a need to incorporate findings into revised management plans and the system for this is not clear.

Forest managers should ensure that n/a they can demonstrate evidence that significant findings of such research, as well as the results of monitoring by the forest management enterprise, are incorporated into updated policies, plans and procedures.

2007.23

7.4

Public summary of management plan. A public summary Minor raised of management has been produced. However it does not to Major provide information on all of the main elements listed in March 2009 Criterion 7.1.

Forest managers shall make publicly 3 months available a summary of the primary elements of the management plan, including those listed in Criterion 7.1.

2007.24

8.1

Monitoring programme. Iwokrama Integrated Monitoring Minor raised System (IIMS) has been drafted but is not yet complete and to Major is not fully implemented. There is scope for Iwokrama to March 2009 develop further clarity in the development of its IIMS it would appear that a fundamental evaluation of key forest attributes and organisational purpose would help to clarify management objectives (see Criterion 7.1) and thereby help to clarify, focus and possibly simplify the associated monitoring regime sufficiently to make its implementation appropriate, practical and affordable.

Forest managers shall ensure that 3 months the frequency and intensity of monitoring be determined by the scale and intensity of forest management operations as well as the relative complexity and fragility of the affected environment. Monitoring procedures should be consistent and replicable over time to allow comparison of results and assessment of change.

2007.25

8.2e

Monitoring cost productivity and efficiency of forest Minor raised management. Iwokrama has commenced estimating costs to Major and incomes for the timber operation. Iwokrama do not March 2009 have direct access to this data (implemented by the joint venture partner). Iwokrama has produced an evaluation of likely costs and incomes for the timber operation as part of the EIA, however, this differs from the assessment and actual costs of the joint venture partner. Apart from timber harvesting there has not been an evaluation of costs incurred that are required to service the forest management operation. There is currenty no basis upon which to evaluate productivity and efficiency. In the context as a model for other forest managers and to demonstrate sustainable forest management including economic performance this is an important omission

Forest management shall include the research and data collection needed to monitor: Costs, productivity, and efficiency of forest management.This information must be shared between all parties ITI, TGI and the community to ensure transparency to criteria 2.2 and 3.1.

6 months Note 6 month deadline given based on communities own recognition of limitations in ther capacity to respond quickly

2007.26

8.3

FSC Chain of custody code. Iwokrama do not currently have an FSC chain of custody code. This will need to be incorporated into chain of custody documents.

2007.27

9.4

Minor raised Forest managers shall ensure that to Major Invoices issued for certified timber March 2009 sales specify: - The source of the certified timber - the date of sale - the quantity of certified timber sold - the specifications (species, dimensions, quality) of certified timber sold - the point at which the buyer shall take control of the chain of custody of the certified timber - certificate code - correspond to details on delivery documents Annual monitoring of HCVF attributes. There is Minor raised Annual monitoring shall be monitoring and a set of monitoring protocols has been to Major conducted to assess the effectiveness established. Some of these have yet to be implemented. March 2009 of the measures employed to Note comments under 7.1 Objectives, and 8.1 Monitoring. maintain or enhance the applicable There is scope to improve clarity of objectives, particularly HCVF attributes. in relation to biodiversity, and thereby associated monitoring. Use of the HCVF attribute assessment could be better used to inform the content and prioritisation of monitoring programmes.

1 month Note a 1 month deadline is given to limit risk within FSC supply chains.

3 months

2007.28

3.3

Compensation for traditional knowledge. It is not clear Rec that there is fair compensation for use of traditional knowledge e.g. Tree spotters. There is a need for a procedure to document this knowledge. There is evidence that such applications exist but it is not known to what extent these have been documented. At least one case was reported to the auditors of indigenous knowledge but it is not clear if there is a system to record these and if the system is known to community members and to forest managers. See also comments at 2.2.3 Conflict resolution. Procedures for resolving complaints, disputes and conflicts are documented in the CoManagement agreements with Fairview community and NRDDB. However, the establishment of the Complaints Committee was incomplete at the time of the audit as Fairview (and NRDDB) had not identified their representatives for the Committee. Further, the NRDDB/IIC co-management agreement had expired. These documents do not explicitly address issues of compensation. Neither is it clear how potential damage caused by the activity of TGI would be dealt with. . Minor

Forest managers should ensure that local communities are fairly compensated for any such applications, in accordance with prior agreements.

n/a

2007.29

4.5

Forest managers shall ensure that Next surveillance appropriate mechanisms shall be employed for resolving grievances and for providing fair compensation in the case of loss or damage affecting the legal or customary rights, property, resources, or livelihoods of local peoples. Measures shall be taken to avoid such loss or damage.

2007.30'

6.1, 7.1

EIA compliance. Environmental Impact Assessment has been submitted to EPA and approved. However, the assessment of water quality to establish baseline conditions was considered inadequate and there was not full compliance with implementation of Environmental Permit conditions at the time of the audit.

Minor raised Forest managers shall fully implement the systems required for to Major March 2009 the assessment of environmental

3 months

impacts.

2007.31

7.1

Field supervision of operational staff. Training has been Minor raised carried out at different levels within the organisation and to Major there is good supervision of staff in the field. However, the March 2009 capability & procedure by which IIC staff can adequately control TGI staff is unclear.

Forest managers shall ensure that there is supervision of field activities to assure that operative norms are duly implemented.

3 months

2007.31 contd

7.1

Field supervision of operational staff contd.

2007.32

8.4

Rec raised to Monitoring - incorporation into management planning. There is evidence to demonstrate that the Minor results of research and monitoring have been incorporated into management plans (eg reviews in Environmental Management Plan), however ongoing monitoring has yet to be fully implemented and the management has not yet undergone periodic revision following implementation of the first plan period. It is anticipated that monitoring protocols will feed into management planning. Clear evidence of this will be required at future surveillance visits.

The results of monitoring shall be incorporated into the implementation and revision of the management plan.

Next surveillance

2007.33

1.1, 2.1

Co-management agreement. The CoManagement Minor Agreement between IIC and NRDDB expired on December 31, 2006. There was no evidence of extension or renewal at the time of audit pending reconstitution of NRDDB as a Council

Forest managers should ensure that Next surveillance there are written agreement on specific use areas between parties with overlapping use rights exists and ensure there is compliance with agreements.

2007.34

2.3

Disputes resolution. Iwokrama has a disputes resolution procedure. However there are no clear terms of engagement between TGI and Fairview; it is therefore unclear how would Fairview deal with disputes (if any) with TGI.

Minor raised Forest managers should ensure that mechanisms exist for resolution of to Major March 2009 disputes between the forest

3 months

operators TGI and the local community over claims relating to tenure and/or use rights.

2007.35

2.3

Disputes resolution - halting prejudicial operations. In addition to dispute resolution mechanism, Iwokrama has entered into joint management agreement with the local community which includes mechanisms for dealing with complaints, dispute and conflicts. See clause 13. However Clause 13 of does not require that in the event that forest operations may prejudice the future enjoyment of community rights that such operations are halted.

Minor raised Forest managers shall ensure that in 3 months to Major the event that forest operations may March 2009 prejudice the future enjoyment of community rights that such operations are halted.

2007.36

2.3 Disputes resoltion - complaints officers. There is a coRec management agreement that details the relationship between Fairview and Iwokrama and complaints disputes and conflict procedures.Clauses 13.1 requires appointment of complaints officers and there was no evidence that this had been implemented at the time of the audit.

Forest managers should fully implement proposed complaints, disputes and conflict resolution procedures.

n/a

2007.37 2.2, 3.1

Community resources and free and informed consent. Within the wider community there is generally poor understanding of the economics of the timber operation and consequently a limited basis for the communities themselves to evaluate whether they are receiving appropriate payment for use of the forest resource.

Rec

See also CAR 2007.5. To ensure transparency of negotiation it is recommended that an independent financial arbiter be present for negotiations between all parties in relation to financial benefit sharing arising from forest resources.

n/a

Observations below relate to Surveillance 1 carried out January 2009.

2009.01 1.3 4.1 4.3

ILO Compliance. Some site workers did not have employment contracts.

Major

Iwokrama shall ensure that all workers have contracts prior to commencement of work.

3 months

2009.02

1.3 Minimum wage. Rates of pay for recently hired workers at Major the sawmill site appeared to be either undefined and/or below the national minimum wage

Iwokrama shall ensure that all workers receive rates of pay at or above the minimum wage.

3 months

2009.03

1.3 Wage deductions. Whilst workers are not held in debt Rec bondage (i.e. are forced to work as a consequence of debt), they have little or no control over costs which they are requried to cover in order for them to fulfill their duties. This may be seen as employers passing on costs for which they should take responsibility and may have the effect of reducing take home pay to below the national minumum wage.

Iwokrama should ensure that terms n/a of employment do not result in employees covering costs that should be the responsibility of the employer.

2009.04

2.1 Definition of area. Area of forest managed by Iwokrama is not consistently quoted in management documents, licences etc.

Rec

Iwokrama should consistently quote n/a the area that it manages in management documents and licences etc.

2009.05

2.3 Local community business development. Local communities have limited knowledge and capacity to develop effective use of timber produced locally.

Rec

Iwokrama should assist local communities to develop their knowledge and capacity to effectively use timber produced locally.

n/a

2009.06

2009.07

4.1 Social impact assessment - terms and conditions of Minor employment. Many workers have been brought in to the timber operation from outside the area. This has potential social impacts. Greater consideration of local cultural needs and attitudes to employed work could potentially result in greater uptake of employment from local communities. 4.1 Minimum wage. Rates of pay for recently hired workers at Minor the sawmill site appeared to be either undefined and/or below the national minimum wage

Iwokrama shall review employment Next surveillance terms and conditions to ensure that local and forest-dependent people have equal access to employment and training opportunites

Iwokrama shall review employment Next surveillance terms and conditions to ensure that all workers receive rates of pay commensurate with their duties and that in no case are they below the national minimum wage.

2009.08

4.1 Accident compensation. There was evidence of inadequate compensation following a serious accident. Previous concerns raised in relation to compensation mechanisms appear not to have been addressed.

Major

Iwokrama shall ensure that there are 3 months assured compensation benefits in case of accidents.

2009.09

4.2 Camp conditions. Plans are in place to develop facilities at Minor the camp however, at the time of the audit conditions at the sawmill camp were poor in relation to hygeine and sanitation. Facilities provided were poor and not being used.

Iwokrama shall ensure compliance Next surveillance with all relevant legislation relating to health & safety of employees and their families when in situ (Occupational Health and Safety Regulations, EPA hazardous materials regulations and provisions concerning Health and Safety, operational and camp hygiene in the Code of Practice for Timber Harvesting

2009.10.

4.3 Terms and conditions of employment. There was Major evidence of training and awareness in relation to ILO requirements. However recently hired workers at the sawmill site had no contracts, were unaware of their terms and conditions of employment prior to commencement, and had received no briefing in relation to rights to associate and bargain collectively. Local community members expressed an interest in different terms and conditions of employment to those offered but there did not appear to be an effective mechanism for negotiating this.

Iwokrama shall ensure that all workers have contracts and that their rights to freedom of association, the right to organise, and bargain collectively are protected.

3 months

2009.11

4.4 Social impact assessment. Development of the mill site is Major arguably the single biggest social impact in recent times and lack of a social impact assessment is a major omission. Concerns have already been raised in relation to impacts of introducing a cash economy to traditional communities, increased risk of sexually transmitted diseases, alchohol use, impacts upon the nearby Fairview community. Conversely, the development plans to include facilities (canteen, medical, education, sports, social use) which have the potential to bring positive benefits. These potential benefits to the local community have not been evaluated. Iwokrama has built substantial social capital through its community work to date, however, failure to effectively evaluate the social impact of such a major social change to the area has the potential to put this at risk and is a major oversight. Note following submission from Iwokrama a 6 month deadline was agreed for this CAR in recognition of the need for consultation with communities and the social nature of the work involved.

Iwokrama shall provide an 6 months evaluation of the social impact (resource access and social well being), appropriate to the size and intensity of their operations that: - identifies affected groups - includes consultation with affected groups - identifies the main impacts of the operation on those groups - specifies measures to ameliorate identified negative impacts - provides for regular contact with affected groups to monitor effectiveness of measures.

2009.12

5.1 Independent financial advice for communities. Rec Communities have expressed an interest in gaining a better understanding of the financial aspects of the timber operation. There appears to have been little involvement to date in discussions relating to the marketing of environmental services. However they also recognise their own capcity limitations in terms of ability to evaluate these issues. A similar situation has occurred in relation to legal issues and the community have received support from independent legal counsel which appears to have brought benefits. Similar support from an appropriate financial arbiter/negotiator would potentially assist community organisations and create greater equality in negotiations. This is not an explicit FSC requirement. This is therefore made as a recommendation.

Iwokrama should consider facilitating independent financial advice for local communities to assist them in evaluating and negotiating financial proposals.

n/a

2009.13

5.6 Harvesting plans. There are plans to re-enter areas already Rec worked. Iwokrama management proposals refer to single entry harvesting with long return periods that underpin the assumptions regarding long term ipacts of harvesting upon yield and forest dynamics. The re-entry is to target species not previously harvested, however, unless this is managed carefully there could be additional (colatteral) impacts. A one-off rentry as part of the lerning process near the beginning of the harvesting operation may be acceptable, but should not be allowed to become the norm.

Iwokrama should plan operation to n/a avoid re-entry to previously worked areas.

2009.14

5.6 Felling rules. One greenheart stump was noted below the Rec 45cm minimum harvest limit. The explanation given for this was that the tree had been damaged during harvesting, that this tree was felled, and in its place another retained (that had been intended for felling) in order to maintain the 10m proximity rule. Nevertheless Iwokrama need to guard carefully against removal of sub mature trees in order ensure succession of the species

Iwokrama should supervise field operations such that sub mature trees (below minimum diameter thresholds) are not felled.

n/a

2009.15

5.6 Post harvest inventory. It is unclear whether the Rec methodology for post harvest inventory will provide a full picture of the effects of harvesting on key species as to date only merchantable stems have been included (hollow trees excluded may have an important ecological function).

Iwokrama should consider revising n/a the methodology for post harvest inventory to gain a full picture of the long term effects of harvesting on species composition.

2009.16 6.1 7.1

Assessment of environmental impacts. There is no Major evidence of a full evaluation of the environmental impacts of the development of the mill site (the original environmental management plan envisaged a much smaller operation with two mobile mills processing a maximum of 6000cum pa the new site is substantially larger

Iwokrama shall prepare an evaluation of the environmental impact of the new mill site.

3 months

2009.17 6.5, 7.3

Training. Many new workers have not received induction Minor and training relative to their tasks

Iwokrama shall ensure that all Next surveillance workers receive induction, training, and supervision to ensure prpoer implementation of management.

2009.18

8.3 Tags. There is a theoretical possibility that unsued tags could be used inappropriately.

Rec

The tag control system could be n/a tightened up so as to ensure that unused tags are removed from stock at the mill site

2009.19

8.1 Monitoring resources. There has been a reduction in staff available to implement monitoring. This has the potential to limit ability to fully implement monitoring plans.

Rec

Iwokrama should ensure that there n/a are adequate resources to ensure that monitoring procedures are consistent and replicable over time. Iwokrama should consider how best n/a to avoid discrimination in remuneration (see indicator 4.1.3).

2009.20'

4.1 Payment of workers. Consultation with mill site workers and local communities indicated disatisfaction with pay dates being irregular, unpredictable and sometimes late.

Rec

Date, Observation and evaluation

Status

Date Closed Oct-09

date of the finalised report. Jan 09. Lack of clarity remains. The function of ISTI Closed remains unclear, it employs no staff and has no substantive financial or legal function. Jul 09. An agreement has been drafted and signed between IIC and ITI clarifying roles and the basis for service provision. This document does not define the role of ISTI and there is no constition defining the activity of ISTI although email communication 18/6/09 states "ISTIs sole purpose is to provide a formal forum for the partners to discuss operational and strategic issues". Iwokrama have clarified with GFC and EPA legal entity responsible for implementation of forest management and in whose name licences are issued. See letter from GFC and revised licence EPA. CAR open pending formal definition of role of ISTI. Oct 09. Statement produced defining role of ISTI "primary purpose of providing for its partners, ITI and TGI, a forum where they could meet to discuss operational and strategic issues such as marketing and branding, production, species selection, and certification and provide government liaison services.....engage communities in discussions on community related and other

Oct 09. Statement produced defining role of ISTI "primary purpose of providing for its partners, ITI and TGI, a forum where they could meet to discuss operational and strategic issues such as marketing and branding, production, species selection, and certification and provide government liaison services.....engage communities in discussions on community related and other forestry issues.... provides a formal structure for development for an FSC certified timber operation using international best practice" Jan 09. Anomalies remain eg staff of IIC signatures Closed on permit which uses the names of ITI and ISTI. Jul 09. Iwokrama ITI services agreement provides for IIC staff to be seconded to and sign legal documents on behalf of ITI. Written confirmation received from GFC re legal entity and EPA Environmental Permit in name of ITI. Oct 09 New sawmill licence issued by GFC on 12th Feb 2008 in name of ITI. Jul-09

Jan 09. Issue referred to Lands and Surveys, and Closed GFC. Confirmation received that precise area quoted by Iwokrama in management plans, 371,681ha (based upon GIS mapping) is correct. Iwokrama have letter of authorisation from Fairview in relation to area under Fairview tenure, plus co-management agreement.

Mar-09

Jan 09. Agreement in place with Fairview, however Closed confirmation/verification from relevant authorities not in place. Jul 09.Letters sent to Guyana Forestry Commission (GFC) and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)detailing Iwokrama Timber Inc (ITI) and relationship with Fair View. Letter confirming authority received from GFA. Oct 09. No new agreements in relation to Fairview. With assistance from Iwokrama Fairview have directly entered into an agreement with USAID on local lumber processing project. Oct 09. Post harvest inventory for two closed Closed blocks reviewed. Methodology includes collection of data relating to greenheart/Purpleheart >20cm, and non merchantable trees. Initial results suggest that for Greenheart residual merchantable volume is 7.45cum. Data being collected appears adequate to prepare evaluation of impacts of logging on residual stands.

Jul-09

Oct-09

Jan 09. Fairview management plan remains Closed incomplete. Jul 09. Community Consultations Completed. Fairview management plan prepared together with zonation and planning maps. Oct 09. Consultation with Fairview confirmed that management plan completed and agreed. Plan reviewed with village members and evidence that it is being implemented.

Jul-09

Jan 09. Community consultation suggests that Closed there has been regular provision of material and that this has been used to satisfy local orders for timber. This is considered sufficient to close the recommendation, however a further recomendation is made to assist local communites in developing the ability to process and effectively use material provided. See 2009.06. Oct 09. Village representatives are working with TGI at mill site to select timber which is then periodically delivered eg for construction of community centre and for household use. Fiarview commencing project to process and add value to timber supplied by TGI. However note new rec 2009.0x Jan 2009. Contracts have been revised to include reciprocal rights to voluntarily terminate. Oct 09. Contracts reviewed at Iwokrama and TGI. New contracts reviewed included right to terminate. Closed

Mar-09

Mar-09

Jan 09. Practice on site included helmets and high visibility jackets given to operators, managers and visitors. Task based risk assessments had been carried out but were not on site, no site based risk assessments were in evidence. Not all workers had been trained. Some improvement was seen in relation to chainsaw operators with ear defenders and eye protection in evidence. Protective safety trousers had been ordered but were not in use at the time of the audit. No chainsaw safety boots were seen although chainsaw operators expressed interest in using these. A number of new chainsaws were seen however a chainsaw with a defective chain brake was again noted. Sawmill workers apparently had no ear protection, and those involved in manual handling of sawn lumber did not have re-inforced foot protection (e.g. toe caps).

Jul 09. ITI has conducted Site Based Assessments Closed TGI now has 16 pairs of chaps on site and all operators have been issued with same. There are currently five 660 chainsaws with chain brakes working on felling and bucking. TGI has revised the Fee for Service Contracts to include a clause which refers to Chainsaw Brakes. ITI has written to TGI documenting a new "Zero Tolerance Policy" on the Use of Safety Gear. Site signs have been erected requiring a safety first approach and monitoring checks implementation of use of PPE. Oct 09. Field inspection demonstrsted that all mill operators seen were using appropriate PPE (protection for head, feet, eyes, ears, respiration, hands). Chainsaw operators seen using protection provided (head, eyes, ears, hands, feet, legs). Task based risk assessments reviewed, training records for all workers seen, induction training includes H&S management. Examples of management (stop work) noted as implemented. Interview with workers confirmed induction training and demonstrated awareness of requirements. CAR ITI accounts and budgets seperated from IIC. ITI Closed budgets available for 2009, 2010. However, these do not appear to cover all social and environmental costs. Jul 09. ITI budget for 2013 presented.Iwokrama ITI Services Agreement Revised Cash Flows for ITI up to 2013. Oct 09. Budgets further revised to give greater detail to social and environmental provisions.

Jul-09

Jul-09

Jan 09. Although revenue has been dispersed to the Closed local community, the basis upon which this has been calculated remains poorly understood, and consultation demonstrated a growing interest in gaining better information regarding the economics and relative benefits deriving from the timber operation. See also CAR 2009.12. Note also that whilst Iwokrama is actively researching how it may market the environmental services in maintaing the forest area there appears to have been little consideration to date as to how thsi may be used to derive benefit for local communities and little or no consultation in this regard. Jul 09. Outreach sessions conducted with Fair View Village and will be conducted periodically by the Iwokrama Team Chartered Account contracted to provide independent financial information to Fair View. Note effectiveness of communication to be evaluated at next surveillance.

Jul-09

Jan 09. There has been provision of lumber to local Closed people by TGI. There have been some examples of the local community supplying product eg sawn lumber and an exampe of boat building. There has been some support for business development training within local communities and there has been a submission for funding from ITTO to support a local community forestry project. Oct 09 ITTO project did not proceed. USAID project to fund value adding to timber with support to purchase processing equipment. Village may also be able to provide servives to TGI.

Mar-09

Jan 09. There has been a major investment in Closed foresty machinery with skidders, loaders and road construction machinery on site. All appeared to be in good condition with on site workshop being used for regular servicing, repair and maintenance. Oct 09 New equipment noted on site eg Skidder appeared appropriate.

Mar-09

Jan 09. Permanent sample plots have been Closed established. A volume and decay study has been implemented as part of an ITTO project. However, post harvest sampling has not been carried out as harvesting has not yet been completed (some areas to be re-visited). It is also unclear whether the methodology for post harvest inventory will provide a full picture of the effects of harvesting on key species as to date only merchantable tems have been included (hollow trees excluded may have an important ecological function). See Recommendation 2009.15 Jul 09. Iwokrama have revised their post harvest inventory methodology to include collection of data on greenheart/purpleheart of non commercial quality. This should help to build a picture of the post harvest residual population of these species. Inventory has been completed for blocks that have been closed thus far. Field Test of Post Harvest Silvicultural Survey Methodology conducted on two closed blocks.

Jul-09

Oct 09. Post harvest inventory for two closed blockc reviewed. Methodology includes collection of data relating to greenheart/Purpleheart >20cm, and non merhantable trees. Initial results suggest that for Greenheart residual merchantable volume is 7.45cum/ha (removed volume 4.43cum); Residual Greenheart population >20cm 75 trees/ha (removed 6.48). Initial data appears consistent with plans and sustainable yield predictions.

Jan 09. Pre-operational checklists exist for Closed preparation of log markets, mill site, and waste protocol has been prepared. Forestry Code of Practice is used as a general reference though its application is not systematic and is dependent upon individuals abilty and training. Similar preoperational checks do not exist for road construction or preparation of harvesting sites. There is no evidence of a full evaluation of the environmental impacts of the development of the mill site (the original environmental management plan envisaged a much smaller operation with two mobile mills processing a maximum of 6000cum pa the new site is substantially larger. See CAR 2009.16.

Jul-09

Jul 09. Iwokrama have adapted the GFC code of practice as a series of operational checklists. These are used before, during and after operations in each compartment. Checklists for: planning, construction and operation of roads; skid trails; water crossings; log markets; directional felling and bucking; solid waste management. Oct 09. Evidence seen of checklists being used eg. Block 39. New road construction appeared well planned and implemented and in accordance with GFC code. Jan 09. The development of the mill site camp has the potential to have an impact upon potential fauna and flora in the locality. Controls and monitoring in relation to this are not clear. Jul 09. Hunting Off-take Data Base set up. Data available from April 2009 Systems set up for both ranger stations. System currently being developed with Fair View. Hunting Off take Data Sheets Fish Consumption Records from Field Station. Oct 09. Fairview reporting of subsistence hunting commenced and data sheets seen. Project fauna (Univ Hawaii) collection looking at off take and usage. Clear no hunting policy at TGI mill site included in induction process. Open

Jan 09. Specific protocols/guidance in relation to Closed road construction have not been prepared and examples of poor quality roading were noted (flooding, downslope erosion exceeding CoP guidelines). To some extent this may be a function of gaining experience of the site and the way in which constructed roads respond in relation to varying climatic conditions. Nevertheless, road conditions suggest greater emphasis should be placed upon planning and construction of roads and harvesting access routes.

Jul 09. ITI has developed a series of protocols and Closed associated checklists related to Roads and Water Sources ITI providing technical guidance for Road Building to TGI through FTCI. TGI and Meckdici Mining Company currently in negotiations for Machine Rental - grader - to increase Road Building Capacity. Developed Log Market Protocol and Checklist Logging Roads Protocol and Checklist Skid Trails Protocol and Checklist Watercourse Crossing Protocol and Checklist. Registration Sheets from Awareness Sessions. Letter to TGI regarding road building. Oct 09. Compliance checklists used for operational monitoring - include Harvesting, construction and operation of roads; Skid trails; Water Crossing; Log markets. Training has been completed for TGI and ITI staff. TGI have access to additional machinery with own dozer and use of grader. Road visited to blocks 39/40 this had been constructed under guidance from FTCI - road well planned making best use of terrain, adapted to soil type and well constructed.

Jul-09

Jan 09. Chemical use reviewed. Limited use which Closed is recorded and documented. However no clear strategy. Given that potential impacts with new mill site would be at a greater scale if chemical use implemented recommendation raised to Condition. Jul 09. Comprehensive Chemical Use Strategy for the Iwokrama Forest being developed. Oct 09. Chemical use strategy completed - Looks at chemicals their use, alternatives, opportunities to reduce usage reviewed. Jan 09. Store at field station remains inadequate. Closed Planned major fuel storage facility at/near field station will need high quality facility and management. Mill site fuel storage currently temporary - long term storage under construction, but requires completion. As larger quantities of fuel will generally be in use better storage and management needs to be implemented. Jul 09. GuyOil is reassessing the proposed fuel depot project. In the interim Bund Walls have been completed at both sites - Bund Wall at Field Station and TGI. Oct 09. TGI have identified staff to deal with oils, fuels and chemicals. They receive induction training which includes "Plan of Action in Event of Oil or Chemical Spillage). Fuel storage area inspected - bund construction completed..

Oct-09

Jul-09

Jan 09. The Iwokrama Forest mangement plan Closed remains incomplete. There is not a clear statement of management objectives (note link to monitoring). The Environmental Forest Management Plan has been updated. The Annual plan of operations for 2009 has been completed and approved by GFC. The Fairview management plan is not yet completed. The timber operation is developing quickly and demand the attention of Iwokrama staff, but in the absence of an overall vision, plan and clear objectives it is not clear that this is developing in a coherent and compatible way with other management projects. The Iwokrama Forest Management Plan requires completion. Jul 09. Management plan fully revised. Statement of objectives given. Oct 09 - Man Plan for Iwokrama Forest overarching management plan revised. General Vision given. Series of sub plans - compiled - eg Fairview MP, Forest MP. These have own objectives. Jan 09. Sawmill residue and offcuts at site seen at Closed MA no longer present a fire risk having been disposed of through controlled burning. However, with a substantial increase in harvesting volume and occupation at the new mill site, there is potential for increased fire risk. This does not appear to have been evaluated and contingency plans are not clear.

Jul-09

Jul-09

Jul 09. General Fire Management plan for the Iwokrama forest that includes Field Station, Timber Operation and other camps completed (attached) Position Paper based on Fire Management Plan recommendations developed Report on Fire Supression at the Field Station and Mill Site developed Fire Management Plan for the Iwokrama Forest Position Paper on Fire Management Fire Supression at the River Lodge and Mill Site

Jan 09. There have been revisions to the Open management plan and plan of operations based on community input. Monitoring protocols have not yet been fully implemented so the Recommendation remains open. Jul 09. Management plan revised. Includes requirement for revision annually to include review of monitoring and research. Meetings held between Management and Monitoring units, issues arrising from these minutes will be included in management plan revisions as necessary. Oct 09. Revision of forest operational plan discussed - review of monitoring/research to be evaluated at next surveillance.

Jan 09. Public summary available and many documents available publicly via comprehensive web page. However Summary does not include main elements listed in Criterion 7.1. Jul 09. Public summary revised. Oct 09. Web page checked for availability of management plan and noted as present. Jan 09. Monitoring remains problematic for Iwokrama. This is partly due to lack of clarity about what to monitor as the management plan remains incomplete and objectives are not clear (monitoring should relate to objectives which in turn should be derived from an evaluation of the most important features/aspects). It is also a consequence of the IIMS remaining incomplete. Jul 09. Monitoring Summary completed Biophyical and Social monitoring framework documents completed as separate documents. Biophysical on-going with reports sproduced. Social monitoring focused on Fair View. Biophysical Monitoring Framework Social Monitoring Document Monitoring Summary Monitoring Reports. Oct 09. Monitoring plans completed and being implemented. However, note staff issues in relation to ongoing resources to implement monitoring see new Rec 2009.19)

Closed

Jul-09

Closed

Jul-09

Financial information is being collected by Closed Iwokrama. There remains lack of transparency in relation to joint venture partner and there is a consequent lack of information available for local communities to make economic decisions with free and informed consent. See also Recommendation 2009.12 Jul 09. Outreach sessions conducted with Fair View Village and will be conducted periodically by the Iwokrama Team Chartered Account contracted to provide independent financial information to Fair View. Review at next audit. Oct 09. Consultation with Fairview and NRDDB confirmed that outreach had been conducted and accountant had been available. Also that financial information has been provided. Note that level of understanding remains limited therefore ongoing need to inform. See Rec 2009.12

Jul-09

Jan 09. Invoices include certificate code and compartment of origin. However, they are based on a minimum flat rate payment on a monthly basis and do not detail quantity of timber sold, specifications, or cross reference to delivery documents. April 2009. Invoice Revised to include FSC Number and Status. Submitted monthly with harvesting reports to TGI

Closed

Apr-09

Jan 2009. Monitoring protocols remain incomplete. Closed The annual monitoring relating to HCVF attributes therefore remain unclear. Jul 09. The entire Iwokrama Forest is regarded as HCVF (ref Plan and HCVF paper) associated monitoring is integral to the general monitoring protocols. Monitoring protocol documents now completed and being implemented. Oct 09. Monitoring being implemented. (However note staff resources recently reduced see new Rec 2009.20)

Jul-09

Jan 2009. Contracts and rates of remuneration for tree spotters reviewed. Tree spotters interviewed appeared content with terms and conditions of service, both within Iwokrama nd TGI.

Closed

Mar-09

Jan 2009. Co-management agreements have been reviewed and complaints committee established. (However note also 2007.36). Oct 09. Consultation with NRDDB confirmed that complaints commitee established and community representative appointed.

Closed

Mar-09

Not all conditions of the Environmental Permit Closed have been complied with eg water monitoring. Jul 09. Water quality testing equipment acquired, testing on-going. Reports on Water Quality Testing Results Environmental Report 2008. Oct 09 Water quality tests implemented Oct 09 tests seen show no obvious evidence of negative ipacts arising from harvesting.

Jul-09

Jan 09. Generally there is good co-operation between Iwokrama and joint venture partner and Iwokrama have devoted staff to field supervision. Some concern remains in relation to ensuring compliance with Health and Safety Norms, and Road Building Norms. These are dealt with under CARs 2007.09 and 2007.17. As it is Iwokrama's own interest to ensure high standards of safety management on site this CAR remains open. Jul 09. Compliance Monitoring Protocol revised to include stricter supervision of Staff ITI has developed a series of protocols and associated checklists related to Roads ITI has written to TGI documenting a new "Zero Tolerance Policy" on the Use of Safety Gear Revised Compliance Monitoring Protocol Logging Roads Protocol and Checklist Skid Trail Protocol and Checklist Letter to TGI documenting the Zero Tolerance Policy on the use of Safety Gear. Photographic evidence of PPE use seen. Oct 09. On site monitoring in place and PPE seen to be in use.

Closed

Jul-09

Jan 09. Monitoring protocols have not been Open completed and the monitoring programme is consequently not fully implemented. Jul 09. Management Plan notes annual review to incorporte monitoring. Bio-Physical and Social Monitoring Frameworks completed Meetings held between Management and Monitoring units, issues feed into management plan revisions. Iwokrama Bio-physical Monitoring Framework Iwokrama Social Monitoring Framework Minutes- Forest Management and Monitoring. Oct 09. Monitoring protocols in place and being implemented. However note staff resource reduced raisng concern re ongoing monitoring. CAR remains open. (See also new Rec 2009.19).

Jan 09. Collaborative Management Agreement with Closed NRDDB has been reviewed and renewed, consultation with NRDDB demonstrated good cooperation in renegotiating agreement (NRDDB had legal representation).

Mar-09

Jan 09.There are regular liason meetings between Iwokrama, TGI and local people through the auspices of ISTI. However dispure resolution mechanisms with TGI are unclear. Jul 09. Dispute Resolution Mechanisms have been clarified and are now included in the revised compliance monitoring protocol and the standardised outreach message. The Protocol and Outreach Message clearly outlines the process by which communities can express concerns about issues with the timber business. Standardised Outreach Message Revised Compliance Monitoring Protocol. Oct 09. Consultation with NRDDB confirmed that agreement and protocol in place, though no need identified for recourse to use them.

Closed

Jul-09

Jan 09. No change Closed Jul 09. Compliance Monitoring Protocol revised to include specific wording "in the event that a specific activity within forest operations may prejudice the future enjoyment of community rights that such activities are halted" The Joint Venture Agreement is up for renegotiation this year and both TGI and ITI agree to inclusion in the new agreement. Oct 09. Consultation with NRDDB confirmed awareness of arrangement. Consultation with Fairview confirmed that order of felling had been modified to take into account community concerns.

Jun-09

Jan 09. Complaints officers not yet appointed. Fr Malcolm Rodrigues Civil Society Rep, Ivor Marslowe NRDDB, Albertino Peters Fairview. Jul 09. Complaints officers and a civil society representative identified. Oct 09. Consultation with NRDDB confirmed that officers snd representative agreed and in place.

Closed

Jul-09

Jan 09. Legal advisor has been available to communities in relation to contract negotiations. Similar support in relation to finacial negotiations would be beneficial. Jul 09. Chartered Account contracted to advise community on Financial affairs. Oct 09. Consultation with NRDDB confirmed that access to laegal advice had been positive and helpful, with ongoing involvementr anticipated. Usefulness of financial advice less clear though further support would be welcomed.

Closed

Jul-09

Jul 09. System implemented, contracts are Closed generated on site and issued prior to any workers commencing working. Staff Orientation sessions held before staff commence work - checklist used to ensure full induction including contract. Staff Orientation Checklis. CAR closed on basis of system - full implementation to be evaluated at next field audit non compliance may result in suspension of certificate. Oct 09. Employment contracts for Iwokrama and TGI staff reviewed. TGI complete an employment form before issue of a new contract, list of duties, do risk assessment - orientation includes that they understand content of contract. Workers intrerviewed on site all confirmed that they had contracts. Sampled workers contractors were checked and in place.

Jul-09

Jul 09. Workers pay rates evaluated against Closed Ministry of Labour Sawmill workers Wage Order 2008. Minimum actual rate of pay (1750/day) above Ministry Minimum (1300/day).Wage order for Sawmill Workers from Ministry of Labour Copy of TGI's paysheet CAR Closed on basis of system - full implementation to be evaluated at next field audit non compliance may result in suspension of certificate. Oct 09. Evidence seen for all mill site workers - the lowest paid was above the daily minimum defined by Wages Council Act. Some workers working on production/piece rates though resulting pay was substantially higher than minimum rates. Discussion with workers on site confirmed rates. (Though see New rec 2009.20 regarding payment dates). TGI has reviewed pay and deductions for all Closed workers. No examples were seen where, costs were excessive. Income vs cost comparisons noted: 75,000 vs 21,000; 80,000 vs 6492; 100,000 vs 34,000; 590,000 vs 87,000. 124,000 vs12108. TGI policy is now to supply provisions on an "at cost" basis (no mark up). Supplies are also available at Fairview village. Compared to other industry operators Iwokrama provides the high standards of Accommodation and Meals and other services including medical services, housekeeping, and internet facilities to staff free of cost.

Jul-09

Oct-09

Oct 09. Documents currently being reviewed, an addendum will be added to documents as necessary. Will follow what is specified in the Iwokrama Act with reference to accurate size where necessary. egs seen Management plan, Chemical use strategy.

Rec

Oct 09. Iwokrama has provided technical support Rec to Fairview for the purchase of small scale wood working equipment under USAID Funded Project. TGI has developed List of materials available to Fair View and associated price lists. However note some concern raised by villagers that some useable wood has not been made available. Review at surveillance. Oct 09. Social Impact Assessment completed. Aim Open to review work terms and conditions. Review at next surveillance.

Oct 09. Iwokrama have reviewed HR policies and Closed employed HR specialist. Wage order for Sawmill Workers from Ministry of Labour reviewed. TGI's paysheet and Iwokrama Payscale reviewed. Sample of pay advices inspected for TGI workers and workers interviewed to check consistency and accuracy of information. Evidence suggests that all workers are paid above the minimum wage, substantially so in some cases.

Oct-09

Jul 09. Iwokrama have taken out additional Closed insurance to cover serious injury. TGI have Employers liability insurance. All contrcators are required to have cover through NIS. Oct 09. Policy documents inspected and up to date.

Jul-09

Oct 09. Permanent Housing Facilities currently under construction, one dormitory has been built, water provision in place, bathroom compliance monitoring regarding hygeine carried out by ITI. Review at next surveillance.

Open

Jul 09. Iwokrama have employed HR specialist to Closed review all contracts and ensure legal and FSC compliance. Contract reviewed and ILO requirements added. TGI reviewed contracts and added ILO requirements. Ministry of Labour Awareness sessions included awareness on freedom of association, the right to organise and collective bargaining. CAR closed on basis of system - full implementation to be evaluated at next field audit non compliance may result in suspension of certificate. Oct 09. Contracts for recent employees inspected. All had relevant requirements. In addition induction process introduced which includes confirmation of rights - induction checklists inspected. Also included in induction checklist, Ministry of Labour Management commitee has representitives of each section H&S commitee. Recent worker employed interviewed and confirmed that induction process completed including reference to rights. CAR confirmed as closed.

Jul-09

Oct 09.Socio-economic issues have been evaluated Closed in several reports eg Johnson 2008, Socio Economic implications of Iwokrama, as well as consulted upon directly with communities as part of ongoing operations and during the preparation of the Fairview Management Plan. Iwokrama have reviewed the various specialist studies and prepared a Social Assessment Impact matrix which identifies key themes eg employment, population growth, health; identifies potential impacts (positive/negative); measures in place or to implement to control effects; and monitoring planned. Implementation of these measures will need to be evaluated at future surveillance.

Oct-09

Jul 09. Chartered Account contracted to advise Rec community on Financial affairs. Oct 09. Consultation with local NRDDB and Fairview confirmed that services of an accountant had been made available and that information on finances had been supplied. Nevertheless there appeared to be a recognition that economica aspects were not well understood and there was an expression of interest in gaining a deeper understanding and greater transparency. Recommendation remains in place for review at future surveillance.

Jul 09. Iwokrama consulted GFC who are currently Rec updating guidelines to include procedures which companies must follow when re-entering preharvest blocks that were previously approved. Current policy is that GFC only allow Companies to re-enter such blocks for a 1 year period so as to minimise the impact on the forest ecosystem, while at the same time ensuring sustainable forest management. Iwokrama has adopted GFC's Policy. Oct 09. Previously harvested block revisited once and subsequently closed. Future surveillance should confirm ongoing adherence to policy.

Jul 09. The main reasons why this could happen Rec are: a. Due to clearing for roads, skid trails and log markets; b. Due to an adjacent tree being damaged during felling, requiring its subsequent removal; c. Due to an error in tree X and Y coordinate measurements during the inventory, resulting in 2 trees within 10m of each other being selected for harvest (normally the ITI supervisors catch these before they are felled); To reduce the chances of the proximity rule being broken a Felling Protocol and associated checklist has been developed. Oct 09. Evidence that protocols were being implemented. No examples were seen in recent cut blocks of any felling of trees below diameter thresholds.

Jul 09. Post Harvest Silvicultural Survey Closed Methodology has been revised Field Test of Post Harvest Silvicultural Survey Methodology conducted on two closed blocks Revised Post Harvest Silvicultural Survey Methodology Report from Field Test of Post Harvest Silvicultural Survey Methodology. Oct 09. Results of first post harvest inventories reviewed. Methodology includes collection of data relating to greenheart/Purpleheart >20cm, and non merchantable trees. Initial results suggest that for Greenheart residual merchantable volume is 7.45cum. Data being collected appears adequate to prepare evaluation of impacts of logging on residual stands Jul 09. Request for close out action submission. Possible suspension noted. Aug 09. Environmental Impact Assessment produced - 80pp including evaluation of impacts, mitigation measures, actions, monitoring and emergency response. Closed

Jul-09

Aug-09

Oct 09. New timber operations workers now Open undergo an induction training which includes HR issues, Health and Safety briefing, job orientation. Examples were seen of completed induction training checklists and workers interviewed to confirm implementation. Additional courses have been run, some in conjunction with the GFTC, for example. eg. Directional felling, roads construction, skidding. Discussion with employees confirmed training attended. Jul 09. Joint Venture Timber Committee decision Closed that ITI's Forest Manager will keep the unused Tags. Letter to TGI detailing Storage of Unused Tags. Oct 09. Unused tags (relating to zero volume) held by Iwokrama. Rec Jul-09

Rec

3 3.1

3.2

3.3

3.4

3.5

3.6

3.7

3.7.1

3.8 3.8.1

3.8.2

3.8.3

Query regarding entity being certified.

WM comment - see discussion under Criterion 1.1. Sheet 3b. CARs 2007.1, 2007.2.

Tenure and use rights

WM comment - see discussion under Criterion 2.1. Sheet 3b. CARs 2007.3, 2007.4.

WM comment - see discussion under Criterion 2.1. Sheet 3b.

WM comment - see discussion under Criterion 2.1. Sheet 3b. CAR 2007.3.

Community

Specific complaint regarding hours of work and dismissal.

WM comment - see discussion under Criterion 2.2. Sheet 3b. CAR 2007.5. Economic

WM comment - see discussion under Criterion 5.1. Sheet 3b. CAR 2007.10, 2007.11. Query whether in commencing timber operations Iwokrama is deviating from its original mandate.

Lack of community awareness regarding community share of financial benefits from timber operations.

WM comment - see discussion under Criterion 2.2. Sheet 3b. CAR 2007.5. Iwokrama need to strengthen management effectiveness to achieve and demonstrate income generation.

WM comment - see discussion under Criterion 5.1. Sheet 3b. CAR 2007.5.

Environment/Biodiversity Note potential threat from mining operations.

Habitat destruction, Illegal wildlife trade, illegal hunting occur in the region.

Operations

3.9

3.10

3.11

THE CERTIFICATION ASSESSMENT PROCESS Assessment dates Pre-assessment dates 18th - 22nd September 2005 Main Assessment dates 9th - 15th September 2007 Estimate of person days to implement assessment Pre assessment. 12 Field Days = 4 Days Lead Assessor (Forest Management, Monitoring, Health & Safety, , 4 Days Local Assessor Forestry, RIL, Forest Law and administration, 2 Days Local Assessor social issues and indigenous peoples rights, 2 Days Local assessor biodiversity and HCVF. 8 Local Travel Days, 2 International Travel Days, 2 reporting Days Main Assessment 3 Auditors 6 days field, office, stakeholder consultation. Plus Preparation, consultation on standard, consultation on forest management. Assessment team The pre-assessment team consisted of: 1) HJ van Hensbergen PhD. Wildhorus Ltd, SSC Forest Counsellors. Dr van Hensbergen has twenty years of experience of environmental management in the forest industry. He has been a lead FSC assessor for 2) Vanessa Benn Independent Consultant. Vanessa has a BSc Agriculture and MSc Forest Biology. She is an independent consultant and has been involved in the development of sustainable forestry and sustainable agriculture in Guyana for more than ten years. She was a researcher in the Tropenbos Guyana programme and has been a member of the GNIFC for development of FSC standards in the country. The main assessment team consisted of: 1) Vanessa Benn Independent Consultant. Vanessa has a BSc Agriculture and MSc Forest Biology. She is an independent consultant and has been involved in the development of sustainable forestry and sustainable agriculture in Guyana for more than ten years. She was a researcher in the Tropenbos Guyana programme and has been a member of the GNIFC for development of FSC standards in the country. Guyanese local auditor. provided specific expertise in relation to national legislative and regulatory 2) Dr Michael Scott. Dr Scott has B.Soc.Sc Sociology, M.A. International Studies, and Ph.D Social Science and Administration. He has over twenty years, professional accomplishments in teaching and research at the national, regional and international levels in a range of areas relating to governance, social environment and development, institutional building and public policy and has participated in FSC evaluations in Guyana. Guyanese local auditor. Dr Scott provided expertise in social, community, human 3) Kevin Jones. Kevin has a B.Sc. Ecological Science, M.Sc. Forestry and is a Member of the UK Institute of Chartered Foresters. He has experience of managing woodlands and forests for nature conservation, community and production objectives. He has been carrying out FSC forest and chain of custody assessments worldwide since 1996 and has managed the Woodmark FSC certification programme since Team members c.v.s are held on file at the Woodmark office. Report Peer review The Inspection report and draft Woodmark decision was reviewed by a Peer Review Panel consisting of:

1) Hannah Scrase. Hannah has a B.Sc. Ecology and M.Sc. Forestry. She currently works for the Woodland Trust a UK based NGO that manages woodlands for nature conservation and public recreation and previously worked for The Exmoor National Park. Hannah's international experience include work as Environment Officer with the Guyana Forestry Commission, forest research in the Caribbean and relief work in NE Africa. Hannah was Director of FSC UK from 1994 to 1999 and Vice Chair of the FSC 2) Dr. Paulette Bynoe. Dr Bynoe has a BA Geography, M.Phil Environmental Education, and Ph.D Ecotourism, Institutions and Livelihoods: A Study of North Rupununi, Guyana. She has Sixteen years professional accomplishment as a Senior Environmental Officer, is currently Acting Director of the School of Earth and Environmental Sciences of the University of Guyana, Lecturer II, and an International Environmental Consultant in: environmental education and training, environmental management and Certification decision The certification decision was made by: Soil Association Certification Committee 5th December 2007. Rationale for approach to assessment Overview. Iwokrama forest covers a large area.The forest has high conservation value. About half is identified as being allocated for strict protection with the remaining half available for sustainable forest management. Some areas are difficult to access, particularly in the strict protection area. Actual timber production is currently planned in a very limited area. Amerindian communities live in and around the forest, their interest in the forest are strong and Iwokrama have involved local communities in developing The assessment was designed to evaluate the key issues identified facing forest managers - eg High Conservation Values, Community interests and Indigenous Peoples rights - consultation meetings were held with individuals and community groups, repesentative organisations, and other interested parties. In addition commercial harvesting had recently commenced for the first time, field visits concentated on The audit team worked jointly on some aspects of the evaluation. The team also split to concentrate on different aspects of the evaluation. Justification for selection of items and places inspected 09.09.07. Auditors planning meeting 09.09.07 Opening meeting, Iwokrama office. Georgetown. Key management staff, introductions, logistics, confirmation of scope, review of certification process, overview of Iwokrama, Iwokrama community consultation and involvement in management, management plans and implementation. 10.09.07. Teleconference call with Community consultant. Simone Mangal. Detailed discussion of development of co-management agreements with local community, review of community management planning process, review of community mapping process, benefit sharing. 10.09.07. Meeting with Tigerwood International (TGI). TGI as partner company implementing harvesting and marketing of timber. Review of company structure, relationship and contracts with Iwokrama, establishment, operations, company policies in relation to FSC requirements, training, equipment, operational plans, terms and conditions of employment, engagement with local community, business 10.09.07. Meeting with representatives of Guyana National Initiative for Forest Certification. Discussion of development of national standard, current progress, Woodmark adaptation process, clarification of some specific points within Woodmark Generic Standard adapted for use in Guyana. Confirmation that GNIFC standard draft 3 and requirements adequately reflected in Woodmark Generic Standard Adapted for

10.09.07. Meeting with WWF Guyana. Discussion of FSC certification in Guyana, context for forest conservation in Guyana, discussion of issues relating Amerindian rights, discussion of specific points 10.09.07. Meeting with Community consultant. Vanda Radzik. Discussion social aspects of environmental impact assessment, discussion of community organisations active in the area and their engagement with Iwokrama, discussion of funding for community projects, discussion of community rights under 10.09.07. Meeting with Iwokrama managers. Discussion of company structures IIC, ITI, ISTI, TGI, Joint venture business for timber harvesting, allocation of income, econmics of harvesting, allocation of 11.09.07. Travel toFairview VillageForest. Discussion relating to Forest Managememt Planning and Meeting Georgetown to Community. 20 people present. Group discussion, plus separate discussion with individuals. Discussion of community relationship and its development with Iwokrama, community tenure and use rights, understanding of community benefit from timber harvesting and share in ISTI, discussion of TGI activity, opportunities for employment. Participants: 1. Bradford Allicock Toshao (Captain) 2. Augustine Andries - Councillor 3. Leonie Ewell Macushi Research Unit 4. Shirley Andries Vice chairman & Farmer 5. Celest Andries Housewife 6. Sarah George Community Health Worker 7. John Ewell Villager 8. Norbert George Pastor 9. Romdy (?) Alexander Boat Captain 10. Margaret Williams Villager 11. Celestina Peters Housewife 12. Celestine Leo 13. Celina Andries 14. Jean Andries 15. Betina Ewell Housewife 16. Nyota Peters Youth 17. Geraldine Peters Youth 18. Dora Leo Housewife 19. Bernita Alexander Housewife 20. Samatha Andries Assistant Chef 11.09.07. Visit to harvesting site, site office and camp. Essequibo compartment, management unit 7, block 789. Inspection of harvested sites, harvesting machinery, portable sawmill, round and sawn timber, loading and transport of sawn timber. Inspection of timber records, log scaling, tagging and identification of logs and sawn timber. Interviews with site managers, supervisors and workers including terms and conditions, health and safety. Inspection of logging track and bridge construction to cross stream and wet 12.09.07. Visit to Ranger Station RS1.Interview rangers, insoection of ranger station, review of monitoring 12.09.07. Drive to Bina Hill (village to south of Iwokrama). Inspection of full length of main road. Discussion of research projects and monitoring activity.

12.09.07. Meeting with North Rupununi District Development Board (NRDDB), including tourism representative and member of Makushi Researchers (MRU) (Makushi womens group researching and recording Makushi culture). NRDBB as representing 16 communities and 6000 people established as a forum for local development and forum for co-ordinated Amerindian community discussion with Iwokrama. Discussion of establishement of Iwokrama on Makushi traditional lands. Discussion of collaboration between Iwokrama and NRDBB and Iwokrama support for community projects, including projects outside forest area.Note that community lobbied prime minister of Guyana to support Iwokrama. Sydney Allicock - Representing Surama Village, Alphonso Forde - Tourism Coordinator, NRDDB Frank Allicock - MYC & Surama Rep Rodney Davis - ExecBina Hill Institute (BHI) .Local teaching centre. Discussion of development of 12.09.07. Meeting at Dir, NRDDB Iwokrama, relationships between local communities and Iwokrama, awareness, training and teaching in relation to environmental issues, economic benefit from protecting the local environment, role of eco tourism development in bringing economic benefit to local people and relationship of this with Iwokrama, discussion with manager of local radio station - radio as a means to develop local awareness supported by Iwokrama. Participants: Vincent Henry - Director (BHI) Mike James - North Rupununi Credit & Development Trust, Michael Williams - Community Liasion Officer (BHI), Senior Councillor (Annai), Emily Allicock -at Rockview Lodge Rupunini Guest House. Discussion of tourism development in the 12.09.07. Lunch Administrator (BHI) region and work with Iwokrama to develop opportunities. Participants: Colin Edwards & Sydney 12.09.07. Visit to Ranger Station RS2.Interview rangers, inspection of ranger station, review of monitoring activity by rangers, co-ordination with Environmental Protection Agency Wildlife Division with regard to monitoring movement of wildlife out of the North Rupununi area, monitoring of timber movements eg 12.09.07. Visit to Atta Rainforest Camp and canopy walkway. Facility to visitors stay overnight and walkway as tourist attraction. Review of facilities and visitor records, discussion with guides. 12.09.07. Entire length of road bissecting Iwokrama travelled, note thet this is the Georgetown-Letem road, discussion of plans for road and evaluation of potential impacts. 12.09.07. Interview with Iwokrama Director. Discussion of development of Iwokrama as a model of best practice, Iwokrama as a develoment of community relationships, development of conservation based businesses, business development - tourism, timber, non timber products and forest services, intellectual propoerty, future business plan and economic viability, review of financial plans and business partner 12/13.09.07. Review of Human Resources policy, records, and documentation. 12/13.09.07. Review of Monitoring plans and records. 13.09.07. Site visit to active harvesting site. Observation of felling team carrying out Reduced Impact Logging techniques, directional felling. Observation of safety measures, inspection of equipment, interview workers in relation to training, terms of employment, awareness of codes of practice. Observation of log tagging, scaling, recording and arrangements for extraction. Return to field camp and 13.09.07. Iwokrama field station. Inspection of Human Resources policies and records, review of terms and conditions of service, greivance procedures, evaluation of provision of local employment. Inspection of storage and fuel/chemical records and waste management. 13.09.07. Iwokrama field station. Review of management planning, inventory records, use of GIS and mapping, zoning, planning of harvest operations, allowable cut. Pre harvest planning and post harvest 13.09.07. Iwokrama field station review of conservation, high conservation value evaluation,

13.09.07. Return to Georgetown. 14.09.07. Review of Documentation eg Felling Licence, Environmantal Impact Assessment and 14.09.07. Meeting Guyana Forestry Commission.Discussion of context for Iwokrama operation, compliance with national legislation and FSC principles and criteria. Meeting with:James Singh - GFC 14.09.07. Meeting with representatives of Amerindian Organisations - Guyanese Organisation of Indigenous Peoples, Amerindian Peoples Association, TANMOG. Discussions relating to establishment of title for local community, Amerindian experience of other FSC certification in Guyana, conditions for delegation of management control in Amerindian lands, new Amerindian Act, Concerns regarding nature of establishment of Iwokrama (gifting of Amerindian lands), capacity at community level to fully engage and make informed decisions, discussion of Amerindian title within Iwokrama managed area. participants : Colin Klautky - Guyanese organisation of Indigenous Peoples (GOIP) 14.09.07. Meeting with represntatives of Guyana Forest Products Association (representing 62 members with joint capital investment of $72m in Guyanese forest industry). Discussion of issues facing forest and timber industry in Guyana, experience of forest certification to date, need for balance with FSC certification giving due regard to economic issues, social benefits provided by forest industry in Guyana. Participants: Brian Gittens - Guyana Wood Products Ltd S.K. Chan - CEO, Demerara Timbers Ltd Michael King - Caribbean Resources Ltd Kit Nascimento - Public Relations Consultant- FPA 14.09.07. Meeting with representatives of Environmental Protection Agency and Guyana Lands and Surveys Commission. Discussion of land use planning, zoning, road development, environmental assessments and permits. Participants: EPA - Khalid Alladin & Indira Mattai Guyana Lands & Surveys Commission - Andrea Mahammad 14.09.07. Meeting with Senior Managers of Iwokrama. Discussion of business planning, cost centres, economic viability of iwokrama and timber business. 14.09.07. Public Consultation Meeting, Hotel Tower, Georgetown. Meeting held by Iwokrama to present management proposals to stakeholders and open to questions. Brief introduction to certification process by Woodmark including invitation to make comment on Iwokrama performance and upon Woodmark Generic Standard adaptd for use in Guyana.(c.50 attendees). Various questions raised and answered including benefit to local community, adding value and processing, protection for wildlife, planned length of operation in each compartment, cost of certification, impacts upon water resources, role of 15.09.07. Inspectors review meeting. Review of findings, completion of checklist, scoring, review of 15.09.07. Close out meeting. Provision of preliminary feedback on audit team findings, review of next

Standard The Woodland was evaluated against the Soil Association Woodmark Generic Standard and Checklist adapted for Guyana v2.1, modified during the evaluation to meet regional conditions and take account of the existing Guyana National Initiative Forest Certification Standard 3rd Draft. A copy of the standard is Adaptations/Modifications to standard

The standard has been modified to take account of the current agreements reached in the draft standard of the Guyana National Initiative for Forest Certification (GNIFC). Elements of the GNIFC standard incorporated are identified in italics together with the GNIFC indicator cross reference number.

The Woodmark Generic standard was first adapted for use in Guyana during 2005 to facilitate a pre-assessment for Iwokrama. This process took into account the Guyana National Standard draft 3 2005 prepared by Guyana National Initiative for Forest Certification (GNIFC). Every aspect of each standard was systematically compared to the other using a cross reference matrix aimed at identifying similar indicators/norms and identifying those present in one standard but absent in the other. It resulted in the incorporation of a number of elements from the national During 2005 and 2006 the Woodmark Generic Standard underwent some changes in response to new FSC policy and as part of FSC evaluation of the Woodmark Standard against FSC-STD-20In July/August 2007 Woodmark carried out stakeholder consultation requesting comment on the content of the Version 1 of the Woodmark Generic Standard Adapted for use in Guyana. The standard was made available at www.soilassociation.org/forestry. One detailed submission on this standard was received. Version 2 of the Woodmark Generic Standard Adapted for use in Guyana was then prepared taking into account the detailed submission and the intervening In September 2007 a meeting was held with GNIFC representatives, the adaptation process was discussed, specific indicators were reviewed and consensus reached that use of the Woodmark adapted standard incorporating elements of the GNIFC standard would be appropriate. The document used during the evaluation was Version 2.1 of the Woodmark Generic Standard Adapted for use in Guyana prepared September 2007.

Stakeholder consultation process Summary of stakeholder process Consultation commenced on 8th August 2007 by email with further emails were sent on 17th August 2007. A series of meetings were held through the course of the audit (see details under 3.6 above and Annex 2). All consultees were invited to comment on the performance of Iwokrama, as well as to provide comment on the draft forest management standard. The standard v2 was available on the Soil Association web page Meetings and interviews were held with over 50 people representing regulatory authorities, local communities and their representatives, Amerindian NGOs, envionmental NGOs, and commercial Interviews were held with emloyees and contractors on site with opportunity given to express views In addition Iwokrama held a public consultation meeting in Georgetown on 14th September 2007. Invitation was sent by email to contacts known to Iwokrama, press releases were sent to major newspapers and media, advertisements placed in national newspapers and posters were distributed. Over 50 people attended including organisations working with Iwokrama, representatives of government, regulatory authorities, social, community and Amerindian NGOs, environmental NGOs, and commercial interests. The meeting included presentations by Iwokrama staff providing background to Iwokrama and the forest certification process, a description of Iwokrama's approach to timber harvesting. Woodmark gave a brief review of its role and invited stakeholders discuss or submit comments on the performance of

Meetings included consultation with two members of the Guyana National Initiative for Forest Certification. This included discussion of some specific aspects of the Woodmark Standard adapted for use in Guyana, discussion of the way in which GNIFC standard requirements had been incorporated, clarification of the content of some indicators and confirmation that GNIFC members present considered Names and affiliations of people consulted during the evaluation See Annex 2 Summary of main forest stewardship issues raised by stakeholders POSITIVE ISSUES Stakeholders were largely positive with regard to IIC and the proposed activities of ITI. General Wish to see Iwokrama succeed as it serves as a good example of forest conservation and governance in Iwokrama is an organisation that can achieve FSC certification in Guyana Iwokrama is ready for FSC certification. Wish that this certification process will restore confidence in FSC certification in Guyana Iwokrama meet administrative and legal requirements in Guyana. Community Good relationship with local community building relationship over some years Community benefit from harvesting activity Good opportunity for local employment with Iwokrama (largest employer in the area) Good assitance with development of services and projects at community level. Good provision of training and education for local community by Iwokrama Establishment of community fund and payment of funds into this for local projects Iwokrama has facilitated local business development Iwokrama has local Amerindian representative from NRDBB on its International Board Iwokrama facilited North Rupununi Management plan (outside forest area) Iwokrama has provided an opportunity for dialogue between Amerindian representatives and Ministries In the event that Iwokrama succeeds in FSC certification this will benefit local communities. Iwokrama has assisted with development of local services e.g. Establishment of local Secondary Schools, Bina Hill Institute (teaching centre), Local Radio station Iwokrama make efforts to employ and train, workers from local communities most of the time. Local communities exercise enough control over forest operations to protect their rights and resources most of the times. They depend heavily on Iwokrama to find the resources needed to protect their resources. More efforts should be made to empower communities in this regard. Environment/Biodiversity Iwokrama facilitated development of Arapaima (fisheries) sustanable management plan and its Iwokrama has developed improved understanding of the local environment through establishment of wildlife clubs, a wildlife festival, and teaching in schools. Iwokrama has developed positive working relationships with local Amerindian communities and these communities are satisfied with Iwokrama performance. Iwokrama seen as an ideal model for working in Amerindian lands as they are clearly an eco-friendly

Iwokrama has recognised the potential impacts of its operations outside the forest area, particularly in relation to watersheds and aquatic biodiversity, Iwokrama has supported the Guyana Marine Turtle Economic Iwokrama are clearly working to achieve income generation from non-timber sources Iwokrama timber operation is adding value at source (sawmilling in the forest) and not exporting logs this Through Iwokramas approach local people have moved from being concerned stakeholders to involved stakeholders and now to shareholders. Iwokrama has made positive efforts to develop eco-tourism as an alternative income source in the region. NEGATIVE ISSUES There were no explicit complaints or disputes raised regarding Iwokrama, most stakeholder observations were in the form of queries or potential/theoretical concerns that would benefit from being investigated. Note one exception - a specific employment complaint - see below. General Query regarding who was being certified and concern that there should be real partnership with local communities and a clear avoidance of "landlordism". WM comment - see discussion under Criterion 2.1 and 2.2. Sheet 3b. CARs 2007.4, 2007.5. Query regarding entity being certified. Special conditions apply to Iwokrama e.g. it was established under an act of parliament and the organisation is not subject to some duties. It has greater powers and control over its operations when compared to other forest operations in Guyana resulting in an "unlevel playing field". WM comment - see discussion under Criterion 1.1. Sheet 3b. CARs 2007.1, 2007.2. Note problems with a recent FSC certification in Guyana and that this has undermined confidence in the WM comment - noted, whilst this may raise interest in the Iwokrama FSC certification process this should not affect the objectivity of this evaluation. Tenure and use rights Query given that Fairview community has secured tenure over part of the area whether the management plan remains valid or requires adjustment, and query whether Environmental Impact Assessment is valid Query noting that Iwokrama would need clear permission from Fairview community in order to operate WM comment - see discussion under Criterion 2.1. Sheet 3b. CARs 2007.3, 2007.4. At inception of Iwokrama many local Amerindian people were concerned that their lands had been gifted to the world and that they would lose control over their traditional territories Concern regarding the manner in which Iwokrama was established in relation to local community and WM comment - see discussion under Criterion 2.1. Sheet 3b. Query regarding the area under Iwokrama's management - noting that at the time the area was initially identified the area gifted was 360,000ha whereas Iwokrama now give their area as 371,000ha - where has WM comment - see discussion under Criterion 2.1. Sheet 3b. CAR 2007.3.

Community Query the dependence of NRDDB (North Rupununi District Development Board) upon Iwokrama, and that dependence upon Iwokrama may affect NRDBB ability to operate independently. WM comment - Consultation with NRDDB suggested that its establishment was at least in part a response to the establishment of Iwokrama - in order to create a representative community forum and equal basis for discussion and negotiation. There is a close working relationship between Iwokrama and NRDDB, and arguably a degree of mutual dependence. In some respects therefore the comment may have validity. However there was not the impression that Specific complaint regarding hours of work and dismissal. WM comment - this specific complaint was investigated. There appeared to be appropriate grounds for dismissal. The complainant was advised that a grievance procedure was avaialbale and could be used as a first step in Concern that local organisations working with Iwokrama such as NRDDB may not be wholly representative of the communities they represent and that this should be tested. Concern that agreements relating to community relationship with Iwokrama are signed in Georgetown and many individuals not able to see content of agreements (signed by village head (Tuschao)). WM comment - see discussion under Criterion 2.2. Sheet 3b. CAR 2007.5. Economic There was concern that the forest management operations would not be commercially viable and that this would jeopardise the future of sustainable tropical forestry worldwide since Iwokrama has been set up as Iwokrama is isolated from the economic and administrative realities facing the forest sector in Guyana thereby raising questions about how realistic it is as a model. Query whether the Iwokrama model is an efficient use of resources and whether benefits are flowing from Concern that Iwokrama has had financial problems in the past and that it may have difficulty demonstrating that it can be self sustaining. WM comment - see discussion under Criterion 5.1. Sheet 3b. CAR 2007.10, 2007.11. Query whether in commencing timber operations Iwokrama is deviating from its original mandate. WM comment - Article 6 the Iwokrama Act makes provision for the sustainable utilisation of the multiple resources of the rainforest and and to demonstrate that tropical rainforests can maintain biological diversity while supporting economic activity. Timber harvesting as utilisation of one of the multiple resources appears to be consistent with this Lack of community awareness regarding community share of financial benefits from timber operations. Concern that there may be limited understanding within the community regarding the nature of arrangements with joint venture partners. WM comment - see discussion under Criterion 2.2. Sheet 3b. CAR 2007.5. Iwokrama need to strengthen management effectiveness to achieve and demonstrate income generation. In recent years, Iwokrama has suffered huge financial losses; can they maintain the standards needed after At present, certification favours those who are exporting large quantities, who operate large forest operations and who can pay the costs. Can Iwokrama harvest its forest sustainably while ensuring a WM comment - see discussion under Criterion 5.1. Sheet 3b. CAR 2007.5.

Environment/Biodiversity Note potential threat from mining operations. WM comment - This threat was noted, and there was evidence that Iwokrama had detected such activity nearby and acted to ensure that regulatory authorities took action to stop illegal mining. Iwokrama holds rights to control mining within its area. See also discussion under Criterion 1.5. Illegal harvesting still occurs as the Iwokrama area is very large and there is limited man-power. But Iwokrama has installed some systems in place e.g. roadside checking. Habitat destruction, Illegal wildlife trade, illegal hunting occur in the region. WM comment - No evidence of these were noted within the Iwokrama area. There was evidence that Iwokrama monitored movements of traded wildlife passing through the area from outside. There was also evidence of good cooperation with local communities who have advised issues of concern in relation to potential illegal activity. See also Operations Condition of the road - suggestion that the section between the new harvesting site and the river crossing is now in worse condition as a consequence of additional timber lorry traffic.And query as to whether Iwokrama had appropriate equipment on hand to maintain/repair road condition. WM comment - This section of road was inspected and the entire road length travelled. The section referred to was in as good if not better condition than other sections seen. Specific road construction/maintenance equipment was not in place. See also discussion under Criterion 5.3/6.5 and CAR 2007.13. Rumours have it that they are cutting trees but those that do not fall are not included in their calculations as timber. So there might be dead tree standing and excluded from those being logged. WM comment - Inventory, felling, extraction, and sawmilling records were inspected. The active harvesting site was inspected on two occasions no cut standing trees were noted. There were good records and controls in place in relation trees to be felled and no evidence found to support the comment. Query seeking assurance that in accordance with national regulations sustainable harvest was being WM comment - see discussion under Criterion 5.1. Sheet 3b. Confimation that harvest is calculated by species, Other issues See discussion under Sheet 3b - Issues.

Observations

Observations are recorded systematically using the Woodmark Generic Standard and Checklist. The completed checklist is attached as Annex 1. Implementation of the Soil Association Woodmark Generic Standard is based on evaluation of every Criterion of the FSC Principles and Criteria for Forest Stewardship (January 1999). Only minor non-compliances are considered acceptable in order for a certificate to be issued. Major non-compliances result in the issue of a pre-condition. Minor nonconformances result in the issue of a condition or recommendation. Pre-conditions, conditions and recommendations are presented in Section2 of this report. Strengths are identified in the checklist denoted with a score of 4 or 5. Criteria scoring 3 in the checklist meet the requirements of the standard indicating compliance with FSC requirements. Weaknesses at Criterion level are identified in the checklist denoted Each non-compliance is described in detail in Section 2 together with a description of the proposed corrective action (Pre-Condition, Condition, Recommendation). This section also provides details of any actions taken to close out Conditions. The Conditions identified are to be completed within the identified timescales and will be subject to assessment and reporting at subsequent surveillance visits see section 6 of report for details of surveillance visits ISSUES Where an issue was difficult to assess or contradictory evidence was identified this is discussed in the section 3b below and the conclusions drawn given. RESULTS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS On the basis of the observations recorded on the attached standard and checklist annex 1 and subject to the corrective actions in section 2 of this report, it is considered that the certificate holders system of management, if implemented as described is capable of ensuring that all requirements of the applicable standard(s) are met over the whole forest area covered by the scope of the evaluation. And, the certificate holder has demonstrated that subject to the specified corrective actions detailed in Section 2 of this report, that the specified system of management is being implemented An FSC certificate has been issued for the period given in 1.5 an 1.6 above and will be maintained subject to successful performance at surveillance assessments.

Criterion 1.1

1.2

1.3

1.4

1.5

1.6

2.1

2.2

2.3

3.1

3.2

3.3

3.4

4.1

4.2

4.3

4.4

4.5

5.1

5.2

5.3

5.4

5.5

5.6

6.1

6.2a

6.2b

6.2c

6.3

6.4

6.5a

6.5b

6.5c

6.6a

6.6b

6.6c

6.7

6.8

6.9

6.1

7.1a

7.1bi

7.1bii

7.1c

7.1d

7.1e

7.1f

7.1g

7.1h

7.2

7.3

7.4

8.1

8.2a

8.2b

8.2c

8.2d

8.2e

8.3

8.4

8.5

9.1

9.2

9.3

9.4

ISSUES Objective observations are recorded in the completed checklist. The section below summarises key points. It also provides a discussion where an issue was difficult to assess, contradictory evidence was identified or issues were raised by stakeholders and gives the conclusions drawn given. Issue Principle 1 Forest management shall respect all national and local laws and administrative requirements. Legal entity. Iwokrama International Centre (IIC) was established under the Iwokrama Act 1996. The Act gives responsibilities, rights, and priviledges to IIC. The Act also gives title in perpetuity to the forest land. IIC has established Iwokrama Timber Incorporated (ITI) for the purpose of overseeing forest management. Local communities are shareholders in ITI (24%). ITI has in turn established Iwokrama Sustainable Timber Incorporated in partnership with Joint Venture Partner Tigerwood Guyana Inc (Shares 51%:49%). Tigerwood Guyana Inc is a private limited company with private shareholders. This is a complex operational structure which gives scope for confusion and/or miscomprehension. For example several stakeholders questioned which entity was being evaluated for FSC certification. Local people were not always clear regarding the distinctions between the entities, and with the recent establishment of activity with joint venture partner local people were not clear which entity was responsible for different aspects of management. Furthermore there were examples where there was lack of clarity within Iwokrama as to which entity was responsible for which aspects of operation e.g. entity responsible for applications and licences eg. ISTI has applied for EPA licence whereas ITI holds timber removal permits from GFC. There are three key issues with regard to FSC certification. 1) Which entity holds the certificate, 2) Which entity is responsible for ensuring compliance with FSC requirements, 3) Which entity owns and therefore sells the property in the trees i.e. is the first stage in chain of custody. In broad terms IIC is responsible for general policy, organisation and business planning. Particular emphases include research and training. IIC has vested ownership in the timber and NTFPs in ITI (ITI being part owned by local communities). ISTI oversees forest management and is the entity on most administrative applications and licences. Tigerwood implements harvesting (supervised by ISTI). Given that ITI owns the resource and is responsible for overseeing most aspects of forest management in practical terms there is logic to ITI being the certificate holder. This however will place the onus upon ITI for ensuring that all aspects of FSC requirements are adhered to - including where appropriate the activities of IIC, ISTI and Tigerwood. IIC has vested ownership in the timber in ITI. However it is not clear how ITI has vested ownership of the timber in ISTI. CAR 2007.1.

This issue is also of relevance to evaluation of economic viability. The nature of IIC as a research and development organisation as well as forest owner places costs as well as opportunity for funding that go above and beyond those of a "normal" forest manager. The role of IIC also assists ITI in demonstrating compliance with FSC requirements. There is scope for review and clarification of these activities. See also discussion under Criterion 5.1.

Legal compliance. Forest managers have a good knowledge of legal and administrative requirements. Stakeholders commented that there was good legal compliance. Direct consultation with regulatory authorities indicated good compliance. However, anomalies were noted with regard to EIA and GFC permissions with operations commencing prior to full permissions/licences being issued. (Note also that the Legal Entity issue discussed above is relevance here in assuring consistency.). It is not clear to what extent if any this is due to capacity or difficulties with processing administrative requirements. Iwokrama may also technically be exempt from some of these requirements by virtue of the Iwokrama Act. However, as an exemplar of sound forest stewardship both nationally and internationally, Iwokrama should bee seen to ensure that all requirements are clearly met. CAR 2007.7.

All applicable and legally prescribed fees, royalties, taxes and other charges shall be paid. Budgets and accounts show payment of due sums - no non compliances identified. In signatory countries, the provisions of all binding international agreements such as CITES, ILO Conventions, ITTA, and Convention on Biological Diversity, shall be respected. Iwokrama have good awareness of these international agreements, have formally reviewed them in the EIA, have carried out positive work relative some (eg CBD, ILO, ITTO) and no non compliances were noted. Conflicts between laws, regulations and the FSC Principles and Criteria shall be evaluated for the purposes of certification, on a case by case basis, by the certifiers and the involved or affected parties. Iwokrama have invested significant effort in evaluating FSC requirements and have engaged in national level discussions and consultation with regulatory authorities. No conflicts have been noted. Forest management areas should be protected from illegal harvesting, settlement and other unauthorised activities.

Control of unauthorised forest use. Some stakeholders raised issues in relation to unwelcome or illegal use of the forest areas. Examples given included illegal mining, hunting or logging. Iwokrama demonstrated action to control illegal mining nearby. Subsistence hunting is a legal right for Amerindian Communities, other instances of illegal jkilling of animals had been identified by Iwokrama and dealt with appropriately. No examples of illegal logging were noted and there was good control over access into and out of the forest area.

Forest managers shall demonstrate a long-term commitment to adhere to the FSC Principles and Criteria. There is clear statement at the level of the International Board, clear commitment form staff and high leveles of training and awareness of FSC requirements within the organisation as well as among local communities. Clear evidence of long-term forest use rights to the land (e.g. land title, customary rights, or lease agreements) shall be demonstrated. Title. Iwokrama has legal title to the forest land under the Iwokrama Act 1996. There are three issues in relation to title: 1) Stakeholder comment suggests that when Iwokrama was first established there were concerns that areas considered as traditional use areas by local Amerindian people would be denied to them and that it was a loss of traditional heritage. However the current relationship between Iwokrama and local people appears to be generally good, with joint ownership and co-management agreements in place, and good recognition by Iwokrama of the rights of local people. This is not therefore currently considered to be a problematic issue. 2) Stakeholder comment was received regarding the area of land controlled by Iwokrama. The Iwokrama Act refers to an area of approximately 360,000ha. The limits of the area is described in terms of geographical features (eg rivers, settlements) and by reference to longitude and latitude. By contrast Iwokrama has accurately mapped the area asing GIS backed by GPS. This gives an area of 371,681ha. The difference in the figures appears to relate to the accuracy of the methods used to estimate the area and not due to any change in the limits of the boundary or encroachment. The variance between the two figures is c.3%. There is no clear mechanism described within the Iwokrama Act to verify or confirm the area accurately. However, given that the issue has been raised, there would appear to be merit in Iwokrama verifying the precise area and boundary locations with appropriate authorities. CAR 2007.3

3) Stakeholder comment was received in relation to tenure of the Fairview area. Fairview community has gained full legal title to c21,000ha around their village within the Iwokrama forest area. Iwokrama has fully and fomally recognised this title. Iwokrama has also entered into a co-management agreement with the community, and carried out a joint participatory planning process. Consultation with the local community suggested good co-operation. There would nevertheless appear to be merit in Iwokrama cofirming with regulatory authorities that licences and permission relating to operation in this area remain valid. CAR 2007.4 Local communities with legal or customary tenure or use rights shall maintain control, to the extent necessary to protect their rights or resources, over forest operations unless they delegate control with free and informed consent to other agencies. Fairview Community have legal title to c21,951ha within Iwokrama forest area. This is fully recognised by Iwokrama and there is a co-management agreement in place. Other local communities outside the forest area consider that they have customary rights in the forest, again there is a co-management agreement in place. There are income generation and sharing arrangements in place. There is good co-operation between Iwokrama and local communities and stakeholder consultation demonstrated that Iwokrama has good general support from local people and that their rights and resources were generally well protected. However during the evaluation, whilst some members of the local community appeared to understand agreements with Iwokrama, others did not, there were also differing perceptions of how the share ownership arrangement worked and a poor understanding of how this would translate into financial benefit for the community. There was also generally poor understanding of the economics of the timber operation and consequently a limited basis for the communities themselves to evaluate whether they were receiving appropriate payment for use of the forest resource. At the national level stakeholder comment was received questioning the representativeness of local community organisations, and at the local level comment was received noting that content of co management agreement was not known to some individuals and that benefit sharing from timber operations was not understood. The evaluation team recognised that both Iwokrama and community representatives have made efforts to communicate benefit sharing arrangements and that opportunity has been given for individuals to gain access to information, however ongoing support from local communities and their perception that they are receiving a fair share of benefits from the forest are critical to Iwokrama's future and community support for the timber operations, as such ensuring that community consent is fully informed is essential. CAR 2007.5

Peer reviewers and the Soil Associatoin Certification Committee were specifically requested to give consideration to this issue. Further details are given at Annex 5. There was general concern that the community may not be seeing a reasonable return on the timber once the sawmills have taken their share. The village leaders would have made the initial financial agreements but it appears that not all members of the village are aware of the true value of their resource. The committee felt that it was unlikely that all villagers could be expected to have an in-depth financial knowledge and that they have elected their leaders to make such decisions for the good of their community. All agreed however that it was important to ensure that there was transparency of the accounts and other financial information to all parties. This led to modifications/additions to the following CARs 2007.5 'including annual public meetings with community shareholders where annual accounts are explained and discussed'; Cross reference CAR 2007.11 to 2007.5; 2007.25 'This information must be shared between all parties ITI, TGI and the community to ensure transparency to criteria 2.2 and 3.1.; Added Rec 2007.37 To ensure transparency of negotiation it is recommended that an Appropriate mechanisms shall be employed to resolve disputes over tenure claims and use rights. The circumstances and status of any outstanding disputes will be explicitly considered in the certification evaluation. Disputes of substantial magnitude involving a significant number of interests will normally disqualify an operation from being certified. Iwokrama has a clear commitment to working closely with local communities, there were no evident disputes over tenure and Iwokrama clearly recognise use rights of local communities. Iwokrama also has dispute resolution mechanisms in place in the event that their use should become necessary. There is a co-management agreement that details the relationship between Fairview and Iwokrama. The Fairview management plan has been developed jointly with the community and at the time of the assessment was under preparation though not yet finished. CAR 2007.6 Indigenous peoples shall control forest management on their lands and territories unless they delegate control with free and informed consent to other agencies. Some Makushi groups would claim that the entire Iwokrama forest falls within their traditional lands. This appears to be a general feeling amongst the Makushi consulted. At its inception there was concern among local communities that their lands were being gifted without their full and informed consent under the Iwokrama Act. However consultation with community groups and representative organisations suggest that Iwokrama has worked hard to develop community relations and worked proactively to assist community development, that they are securing the long term viability of the forest from which there should be long term community benefit. Local communities currently appear happy with the presence of Iwokrama as forest managers in the region. The issue of free and informed consent is also discussed under Criterion 2.2 above.

Forest management shall not threaten or diminish, either directly or indirectly, the resources or tenure rights of indigenous peoples. Forest management is conservative in nature and the forest resource itself is not threatened by Iwokrama, rather it is protected. Iwokrama explicity recognise tenure and use rights of local indigenous communities and have co-operative approaches to working with them. Sites of special cultural, ecological, economic or religious significance to indigenous peoples shall be clearly identified in co-operation with such peoples, and recognised and protected by forest managers. Archaeological sites have been identified and mapped. There is a procedure to add additional sites a they are encountered in the course of normal operations. Ceiba pentandra, a sacred tree will not be harvested. There has been a participatory planning process with the Fairview Community in which the community have identified aspects of importance to the village and managemet zones established accordingly.

Indigenous peoples shall be compensated for the application of their traditional knowledge regarding the use of forest species or management systems in forest operations. This compensation shall be formally agreed upon with their free and informed consent before forest operations commence. The IIC has stated its intention and adherance to such principles. The Centre has commissioned the study compiled in Makusipe Komanto Isera - Sustaining Makushi Way of Life; which is copyrighted to NRDDB, 1996. Local communities have been informed of the applications and are signatory to co-management agreements with IIC through the Fairview and NRDDB arrangements. IIC has developed a benefit-sharing model which has been shown to the communities. However it is not clear that tree spotters fairly compensated for their traditional knowledge and there is a need for a procedure to document this knowledge. There is evidence that such applications exist but it is not known to what extent these have been documented. At least one case was reported to the auditors of indigenous knowledge but it is not clear if there is a system to record these and if the system is known to community members and to forest managers. See also comments at 2.2.3. 2007.28.

The communities within, or adjacent to, the forest management area should be given opportunities for employment, training, and other services. Employment. Iwokrama is one of the larger employers in the area. Most present unskilled and semi skilled workers are from the local communities. Consultation with local people confirmed that there are employment and training opportunities with Iwokrama. Staff emplyed at the harvesting site also included members of the local community. Management staff are largely from outside. Training is provided for low level posts. There is an HR policy.

Training and services. Iwokrama has assisted the local community in establishing schools and educational facilities eg Bina Hill, as well as provided training courses directly. Iwokrama assists with transport to hospital as well as more general health. There is a programme for Aids Awareness. Iwokrama has assisted development of other community development projects. Forest products. Stakeholder comment was received that greater effort could be made in terms of provision of timber and materials from harvesting. CAR 2007.7. Terms of employment. Joint venture partner contracts for employees/contractors do not give them explicit contractual right to voluntarily terminate their employment. CAR 2007.8.

Forest management should meet or exceed all applicable laws and/or regulations covering health and safety of employees and their families. Safe working practice and management. Practice on site was generally good with helmets and high visibility jackets given to operators, managers and visitors. However deficiencies were noted with regard to provision for chainsaw operators who did not use full personal protective equipment (chainsaw protective trousers, ear defenders, chainsaw protective boots absent) and the chain brake on the chainsaw inspected did not function. Neither Iwokrama nor TGI managers acted to ensure that corrective action was taken. Improved enforcement is required to comply with FSC requirements. Risk assessments have not been carried out. CAR 2007.9.

The rights of workers to organise and voluntarily negotiate with their employers shall be guaranteed as outlined in Conventions 87 and 98 of the International Labour Organisation (ILO). Iwokrama have implemented a training programme to inform employees of their employment rights and ILO provisions. Managers indicate that in principle union membership is possible. Employees interviewed did not express any wish or need to join a union.

Management planning and operations shall incorporate the results of evaluations of social impact. Consultations shall be maintained with people and groups directly affected by management operations. Consultation and social impact evaluation. Community consultation is a strength for Iwokrama with regular meetings, consultations, co-management agrteements and participatory planning processes.

Appropriate mechanisms shall be employed for resolving grievances and for providing fair compensation in the case of loss or damage affecting the legal or customary rights, property, resources, or livelihoods of local peoples. Measures shall be taken to avoid such loss or damage.

Greivance procedures. Procedures are clearly documented. No cause for their implementation has yet been noted as Iwokrama's collaborative approach generally avoids loss or damage.

Forest management should strive toward economic viability, while taking into account the full environmental, social, and operational costs of production, and ensuring the investments necessary to maintain the ecological productivity of the forest. Economic viability. A number of stakeholder comments were received regarding Iwokrama's economic viability. These included the relevance of Iwokrama as a model for management of tropical forest given the atypical backing, funding, and concessions that it receives; querying whether the funds invested in Iwokrama's development are justified in terms of economic returns; and noting that Iwokrama has been through periods of serious financial difficulty. The nature of Iwokrama as a research and development organisation as well as a forest manager does set it apart from other forest management enterprises, and there are inevitably higher costs associated with developing new approaches to management of tropical forest. An aim is that lessons learnt and approaches developed should be available to other forest managers. Given these wider aims Iwokrama is probably justified in incurring higher than normal costs in this respect and seeking outside funding to support By contrast, these these activities. sources of funding do directly subsidise costs that assist Iwokrama in meeting FSC requirements. It is not clear for example how research and monitoring costs are factored against the forest management enterprise. There is no clear cost centre that identifies the operational costs of the forest operation (5.1.1) or the costs associated with social and environmental commitments identified under priciples 4 & 6 (5.1.5). The costs of research and monitoring attributable to the forest management enterprise are not clear. CAR 2007.10. Iwokrama is also harvesting a relatively small timber volume from a limited area given the overall forest area. Whilst in some respects this assists meeting FSC requirements it does place a limit on income from this source, and it is unlikely that this income alone could adequately support all the activities required to achieve FSC certification. Prior to commencing harvesting Iwokrama has researched alternative (non timber) related sources of income, eg Eco tourism, and NTFP development. These have provided limited sources of funding to date, though there is further potential. New potential sources are also being explored - for example Carbon Sequestration. Regard should also be given to the wider economic benefits that multiply within the local community as a consequence of Iwokrama activity but which does not benefit Iwokrama's cashflow. Local people clearly recognise the benefits that Iwokrama brings to their local economy and community development.

FSC Criterion 5.1 requires that "Forest managers strive toward economic viability" i.e. they are not required to demonstrate clear profitability. Iwokrama can demonstrate a gradual shift away from donor income towards earned income (trebled between 2001 and 2006) and whilst they cannot at this stage demonstrate a profitable forest operation there is an active approach to trying to maximise this. Given that Iwokrama can demonstrate that it is striving toward economic viability, lack of profitability should not preclude FSC certification. Nevertheless, commercial management may be seen as a weakness within Iwokrama, and appears to be reflected in the decision to appoint a joint venture partners for harvesting rather than implementing these activities directly, and in the limited commercial development of non timber products/services to date. There is a business plan for Iwokrama as a whole. Actual activity differs from the content of the business plan eg projections in relation to the timber business are behind schedule. There is not a clear financial plan for ITI nor for ISTI. Joint venture partners have a business plan for timber operations this does not anticipate a profit in the first instance due to the necessary initial capital investment. These plans are not shared between the joint parties which limits the effectiveness planning and monitoring of the economics of the operation as a whole. In relation to CAR 2007.11 Iwokrama staff have monitored the estimated value by species of timber harvested under the ISTI arrangement and calculate the value due to the local community. The managers have excellent information about the timber stock. Using conservative potential value (taken from forest managers own market studies) of the timber at dockside in Guyana the value of sawn timber (10000m3 = 50% recovery from round) FOB at georgetown is at least 3 million dollars per year. At present the company will recieve about 6% of this which in turn limits the amount available for the community. Iwokrama aim to monitor financial inputs and outputs of the timber operation however there may be doubt as to whether the current situation can be considered economically viable, or whether the division of value is equitable between the community and other stakeholders.

Forest management and marketing operations should encourage the optimal use and local processing of the forest's diversity of products. Local economy. Iwokrama have worked with local communities and assisted with community and economic development projects eg Arapaima, Butterfly project, Eco Tourism. Much of this has been outside the forest area. The timber harvesing activity also employs some people from the local community. However there does not appear to have been consideration of providing timber to locally controlled enterprises. Negative comment was also received from the local community regarding timber provided from the harvesting operation to date. CAR 2007.12. Forest management should minimise waste associated with harvesting and on-site processing operations and avoid damage to other forest resources.

Harvesting. Harvesting is generally efficient, well organised and implemented by well trained staff and contractors. There was no evidence of significant waste or damage to the forets resource. The choice of extraction machinery appeared to be based principally on availability rather than an analysis of suitability for purpose. CAR 2007.13.

Forest management should strive to strengthen and diversify the local economy, avoiding dependence on a single forest product. Product diversity. Iwokrama have placed an emphasis on reviewing the range of available Non Timber Forest Products and Services and worked with local communities to develop economic activities that avoid a reliance on timber products.

Forest management operations shall recognise, maintain, and, where appropriate, enhance the value of forest services and resources such as watersheds and fisheries. Watersheds and fisheries. Iwokrama have good awareness of water catchment and fisheries related issues in the region, have taken steps to protect water resources and carried out projects in collaboration with local communities in relation to fisheries management.

The rate of harvest of forest products shall not exceed levels which can be permanently sustained. Sustained harvest. Harvesting predicions are based on detailed inventory and set within limits that are accepted within Guyana. Harvesting plans are based on species specific data. RIL harvesting is intended to minimise impact upon the forest. Volume estimates are made for all productive sites together with predicted harvesting volumes. Overall only 29% of the forest area has been identified for future harvesting At present there is relatively little data about the growth and silvicultural response of the forest post harvesting. An issue of relevance in this respect is the long term response of key commercial species to harvesting eg Greenheart, Purpleheart. Research on this aspect elsewher in Guyana is not conclusive but there is the possibility or likelihood that abundance of some species will reduce by the end of the cutting cycle. There are plans to collect data relating to forest response through post harvest inventory and monitoring to determine if further silvicultural interventions are necessary, however the methodology and implementation of this work and how it may be used to test or modify yield assumptions is not currently clear.CAR 2007.14.

Assessment of environmental impacts shall be completed appropriate to the scale, intensity of forest management and the uniqueness of the affected resources and adequately integrated into management systems. Assessments shall include landscape level considerations as well as the impacts of on-site processing facilities. Environmental impacts shall be assessed prior to commencement of site-disturbing operations Assessment of environmental impacts. There is a comprehensive Environmetal Impact Assessment which forms the basis of the Environmental Forest Management Plan (Vol 3). An environmental permit has been issued by the Environment Agency. This deals with landscape level issues. There is also monitoring and survey information available and some of this together with potential site constraints (eg creeks) are recorded on GIS. However this information is not systematically reviewed prior to each forest operation at site level and there is not a site specific assessment of environmental impacts prior to operations commencing. CAR 2007.15 Georgetown - Lethem road. Safeguards shall exist which protect rare, threatened and endangered species and their habitats (e.g., nesting and feeding areas). There is good information about the presence of such species. Endangered, Threatened and Rare species are systematically reviewed with reference to CITIES. Conservation zones and protection areas shall be established, appropriate to the scale and intensity of forest management and the uniqueness of the affected resources. Just over half of the FMU is strict wilderness preserve. The nett operable area accounts for about 29% of the entire forest.

Inappropriate hunting, fishing, trapping and collecting shall be controlled. There is monitoring of the road corridor traffic and barriers where loads may be inspected. Monitoring is carried out in co-operation with the EPA Wildlife division, records are kept. Under the Amerindian Act and Iwokrama Act local Amerindian communities are permitted to hunt for subsistence purposes. There is no evidence to suggest that this presents a threat to animal or plant populations, however, there is no monitoring of this aspect of local community activity and therefore no means by which to evaluate actual or potential impacts. CAR 2007.16. Ecological functions and values shall be maintained intact, enhanced, or restored, including: a) Forest regeneration and succession. b) Genetic, species, and ecosystem diversity. c) Natural cycles that affect the productivity of the forest ecosystem.

Ecological functions. No harvesting is scheduled to occur on 71% of the total forest area. In those areas where harvesting is planned RIL techniques are planned, these should minimise impacts in the areas worked and overall ecological functions should remain intact. In those areas where logging is planned 100% inventory of commercial species is undertaken and species specific felling limits set. RIL techniques including the 10m proximity rule ensure that the residual stand retains representation of all species. Regeneration of valuable species such as Greenheart and Purpleheart were noted in areas recently harvested. CAR 2007.14 aims to ensure that forest managers carry out post harvest inventory so that forest response to RIL harvesting can be evaluated. Representative samples of existing ecosystems within the landscape shall be protected in their natural state and recorded on maps, appropriate to the scale and intensity of operations and the uniqueness of the affected resources. Ecosystems. 50% of the whole forest area is identified as Wilderness Preserve and contains representation of all key forest types.

Written guidelines shall be prepared and implemented to: control erosion; minimise damage during road construction, and all other mechanical disturbances; Road construction. The GFC Code of Practice for Timber Harvesting provides guidelines for road construction, crossing watercourses, log markets. This is supported by the RIL training courses and manuals. Iwokrama have adopted these guidelines. Implementation is currently being carried out by joint venture partner TGI. It is not clear how Iwokrama monitors implementation of the Code of Practice requirements and how corrective action is ensured if required. CAR 2007.17.

Written guidelines shall be prepared and implemented to: protect water resources. Protection of water resources.The GFC Code of Practice for Timber Harvesting has been adopted by Iwokrama. Extraction route construction and log market seen appeared to comply with GFC code of practice guidelines, although it was not clear whether culvert construction using log clusters was in compliance with 4.4 Watercourse Crossings (recommended use of culvert or pipes), and it was not clear whether Iwokrama staff had monitored or evaluated this. A training course is being established for delivery at Iwokrama by the Forestry Training Centre.Given that operations are at an early stage it would be timely to establish robust systems to ensure consistently high implementation of guidelines and it is not currently clear what Iwokrama procedures are in place to ensure this . CAR 2006.17.

Written guidelines shall be prepared and implemented to: minimise forest damage during harvesting, Harvesting guidelines. Reduced Impact Logging Guidelines have been prepared, training provided for operators and implemented on site. Examples of felled areas and felling in progress confirmed minimal residual damage.

Management systems shall promote the development and adoption of environmentally friendly non-chemical methods of pest management and strive to avoid the use of chemical pesticides. Adoption of non-chemical pest management. Currently there is no chemical pesticide use in the forest or as part of forest management which is based on low impact harvesting and natural regeneration. Small amounts of chemical are used at the field centre to control pests in the vegetable plots and mosquito control. Whilst there are currently no chemicals used in the sawmill site, there is the possibility that chemicals to protect or preserve timber could be used in the future. A basic system for recording chemical use, reason for use and alternatives considered has been developed though not yet fully implemented. Whilst overall risk is low there is scope to establish and implement a more robust system. CAR 2007.18 World Health Organisation Type 1A and 1B and chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides; pesticides that are persistent, toxic or whose derivatives remain biologically active and accumulate in the food chain beyond their intended use; as well as any pesticides banned by international agreement, shall be prohibited.

Chemicals listed in Annex 1 of FSC-POL-30-602 Chemical Pesticides in Certified Forests shall not be used unless derogation has been approved by FSC. See Annex 3 to this standard. FSC Highly hazardous chemical list. Iwokrama were not using any chemicals on the FSC Highly Hazardous Chemials List: If chemicals are used, proper equipment and training shall be provided to minimise health and environmental risks. Chemicals, equipment and training. Appropriate training is provided to workers and competence certificates are required.

Stores were inspected at field centre, ranger station, and fuel/oil storage at harvest camp/site. Present stores do not appear adequate, for example at the time of the assessment there were no bunding arrangements in place (though this is planned). Harvesting site management of fuels and oils did not appear to comply with Code of Practice for Timber Harvesting sections 7.2, 7.3, 7.4. (eg no bunding, use of handpumps for fuel, collection and disposal of containers). CAR 2007.19. Chemicals, containers, liquid and solid non-organic wastes including fuel and oil shall be disposed of in an environmentally appropriate manner at off-site locations. Storage of chemicals and fuels. There are systems in place for the safe collection and disposal or recycling of containers. Stores were inspected at field centre, ranger station, and fuel/oil storage at harvest camp/site. Present stores do not appear adequate, for example at the time of the assessment there weree no bunding arrangements in place (though this is planned). Harvesting site management of fuels and oils did not appear to comply with Code of Practice for Timber Harvesting sections 7.2, 7.3, 7.4. (eg no bunding, use of handpumps for fuel, collection and disposal of containers). CAR 2007.19. Use of biological control agents shall be documented, minimised, monitored and strictly controlled in accordance with national laws and internationally accepted scientific protocols. Use of genetically modified organisms shall be prohibited. Biological control agents are not currently used and not considered necessary. No GMOs are used. The use of exotic species shall be carefully controlled and actively monitored to avoid adverse ecological impacts. Exotic species. Forest management is based on natural forest dynamics and site native species.

Forest conversion to plantations or non-forest land uses shall not occur, except in circumstances where conversion: a) entails a very limited portion of the forest management unit; and b) does not occur on high conservation value forest areas; and c) will enable clear, substantial, additional, secure, long term conservation benefits across the forest management unit. Forest conversion. No forest conversion is planned. There is an area within the forest occupied by the village of Fairview which is not currently forest although thi sis a very limited portion of the total area.

The management plan and supporting documents shall provide: Management objectives. Management objectives. There are two key documents containing management planning information "Iwokrama Forest Forest Management Plan" and the "Environmental and Forest Management Plan". The former covers the full range of activities of the centre and in some respects is akin to a general business or organisational plan, though it also contains forest management detail. The status of this plan is not clear, it is not complete, and expires Dec 07. The latter focuses more on management aspects and specifies actions over the first five years of operations. A number of additional documents have also been prepared including a statement on the Silvicultural System and the sustainability of timber production, and site/project specific plans eg Canopy Walkway. The Iwokrama Forest Forest Management Plan descibes structures and process in some detail, and goes on to descibe a series of attributes, their desired condition, and actions to achieve this. However the status of this plan is unclear and it is incomplete. The EIA and associated Environmental and Forest Mangement Plan details operations focussing on harvest operations. These documents together are strong on overarching vision, strong on governance and process, and provide detail on specific aspects of management, however, there is no clear and simple articulation of the objectives of forest management that indicate clearly what managers intend to achieve. CAR 2007.20. The management plan and supporting documents shall provide a description of the forest resources to be managed and environmental limitations. Description of forest resource. The Environmental Forest Management Plan provides a good description of the forest resource, environmental issues and identifies key constraints. The management plan and supporting documents shall provide a description of land use and ownership status, socio-economic conditions, and a profile of adjacent lands.

Land use context. There is a good description of adjacent land use, and use is indicated on GIS maps. This includes the area where the Fairview Community recently established title. There are detailed studies and descriptions of local communities, their demography, socio economic conditions, and uses of the forest by local communities. The management plan and supporting documents shall provide a description of the silvicultural and/or other management system, based on the ecology of the forest in question and information gathered through resource inventories Silvicultural systems. Details are given in Document "Harvesting Timber from the Iwokrama Forest: The silvicultural system and the sustainability of timber production" provides detail, with RIL guidelines providing additional detail on practical aspects of impementation

The management plan and supporting documents shall provide rationale for rate of annual harvest and species selection Rate of harvest. Harvest rates and species are described and based on 100% inventory within areas due for harvesting. The management plan and supporting documents shall provide provisions for monitoring of forest growth and dynamics. Monitoring growth and dynamics. There is a procedure for Permanent Sample Plots that will monitor forest regeneration and growth in harvested and non harvested areas, together with pre-harvest inventory completed and post harvest inventory to be completed once an area has been worked. Need to check that procedures are fully implemented at surveillance. (See also Criterion 5.6 and CAR 2007.14). The management plan and supporting documents shall provide: Environmental safeguards based on environmental assessments.

Fire. Fire risk has been evaluated and is considered greatest to the southern margins of the forest where it meets the savannah of the North Rupununi. It notes that ITI will develop a fire management programme including training, public awareness, monitoring, prevention, communication, co-ordination and suppression techniques. Iwokrama is also collaborating with the GFC on an ITTO funded project looking at fire management. Implementation of this project and planned measures should be evaluated at surveillance. There may be fire risk associated with build up of sawmill residue and offcuts at the mill site. CAR 2007.21. The management plan and supporting documents shall provide: Plans for the identification and protection of rare, threatened and endangered species. Rare species. There are detailed descriptions of key species and habitat types, in addition consideration is given to ecosystems outside the forest area. The management plan and supporting documents shall provide: Maps describing the forest resource base including protected areas, planned management activities and land ownership. Maps. GIS identifies all key aspects of forest resource base, wilderness preserve, operable areas, ownership, location of adjacent communities and planned management. The management plan shall be periodically revised to incorporate the results of monitoring or new scientific and technical information, as well as to respond to changing environmental, social and economic circumstances.

Management plan revision. The Iwokrama Forest Forest Management Plan is due for revision. The Fairview Management Plan has not yet been completed. The Environmental and Forest Management Plan has been revised to take into account changes in the context of management. The plan references research and monitoring results known and takes these into account. Monitoring protocols have been recently revised, there will be a need to incorporate findings into revised management plans and the system for this is not clear. CAR 2007.22.

Forest workers shall receive adequate training and supervision to ensure proper implementation of the management plan. Qualification and Training. Managers are highly qualified including PhD, and University Degree qualifications, there is an appropriate range of skills (social, environmental and technical) and practical forest forest management experience. All key management staff were well qualified and experienced. There is an established programme of training for staff and contractors at different levels within the organisation Training records are kept and were inspected. Egs include RIL, Harvesting Management, Directional Felling, FSC requirements, Health and Safety, Biodiversity Convention, CITIES, ILO requirements and employment rights, tour guiding, Ranger skills. While respecting the confidentiality of information, forest managers shall make publicly available a summary of the primary elements of the management plan, including those listed in Criterion 7.1 above Public summary.A public summary of management has been produced. However it does not provide information on all of the main elements listed in Criterion 7.1. CAR 2007.23.

The frequency and intensity of monitoring should be determined by the scale and intensity of forest management operations as well as the relative complexity and fragility of the affected environment. Monitoring procedures should be consistent and replicable over time to allow comparison of results and assessment of change. Appropriate Monitoring. Iwokrama has invested significant staff time and resources into research and monitoring of the forest resource over the last ten years. There have been various studies and monitoring protocols proposed and implemented, and detailed Biophysical monitoring protocols have been prepared. A detailed and thorough review of monitoring is presented in a draft document "Iwokrama Integrated Monitoring System" (IIMS) (20 mar 07). This makes a number of important observations including but not limited to:

a) that monitoring proposals in the past have tended to focus on technical or biophysical aspects with limited attention to social or socio economic/ecological aspects; b) that community and partner organisations need to be incorporated into monitoring systems; c) that monitoring programmes can become very demanding of resources; d) that as a consequence of c data is often not analysed and thereby not always effectively used. The IIMS provides a framework for development of monitoring protocols some of which are already implemented, some of which are developed but not yet fully implemented and some have yet to be developed and have not been implemented or fully incorporated into a fully coherent monitoring plan. The IIMS makes another critical observation p33 "One usually determines what data to collect based on specific objectives". This in turn would normally be derived from a systematic evaluation of what the most important attributes of the forest resource are and an evaluation of purpose of the managing organisation. i.e. management objectives should reflect a combination of what is imporant about the forest and what managers wish to achieve. Clear objectives lead to clarity in monitoring regimes. Under Criterion 7.1 above it is noted that Forest Management Objectives are not clear. This is possibly reflected in the large number of attributes identified for monitoring. In order for Iwokrama to develop further clarity in the development of its IIMS it would appear that a fundamental evaluation of key forest attributes and organisational purpose would help to clarify management objectives and thereby help to clarify and focus and possibly simplify the associated monitoring regime sufficiently to make its implementation meaningful, practical and affordable. Note also observations under Criterion 9.4 regarding the identification and prioritisation of HCVF attributes and their monitoring. The IIMS is currently incomplete and not yet fully implemented. CAR 2007.24. Forest management should include the research and data collection needed to monitor: Yield of all forest products harvested. Monitoring yield.Details of all timber felled is recorded and reconciled to to the 100% inventory data collected prior to harvesting. Production and shipping records are collated . Forest management should include the research and data collection needed to monitor: Growth rates, regeneration and condition of the forest. Monitoring growth. 100% inventory carried out prior to harvesting. Post harvesting evaluation. Existing research data has been analysed and studies have been carried out (eg Alder 2000, Zagt 1997, Arrets, de Hout, Zagt 2003) and reviewed by IIC Trevin (2007). A system of PSPs is being established. Note need to evaluate implementation of PSPs at surveillance. Forest management should include the research and data collection needed to monitor: The composition and observed changes in the flora and fauna.

Monitoring fauna and flora. There is a monitoring protocol for rare and endangered species. This includes aquatic habitats. Routine and non-routine wildlife sightings are recorded, and include Phenology transects, Road and River monitoring reports, field logbooks are kept at ranger stations, logging camp, field station, canopy walkway. Monitoring protocols explicitly consider the species listed under this indicator plus others such as understorey bats, caiman spp. Forest management should include the research and data collection needed to monitor: Environmental and social impacts of harvesting and other operations. Monitoring Social and Environmental impacts. There are regular meetings with communities and written co-management/collaborative management agreements. There has been a participatory management planning process with Fairview community and zoning management consultations and consultation with local communities on the management plan. There is clear ongoing collaboration with local communities. Further social monitoring protocols are planned for implementation. Social impacts of forest management are included in the EIA. Medical facilities are provided and aspects of health monitored. Social monitoring protocols include consideration of health and well being of workers.There are awareness programmes for HIV, Malaria, STDs . Monitoring protocols specific to harvesting impact include pre and post harvesting stand evaluations, water quality monitoring as required by EPA, fauna and flora assessments. Other monitoring protocols should also pick up issues in relation to harvesting egs wildlife and aquatic life monitoring.

Forest management should include the research and data collection needed to monitor: Costs, productivity, and efficiency of forest management. Monitoring productivity. Iwokrama has commenced a process of establishing/estimating costs and incomes for the timber operation. Iwokrama do not have direct access to this data as this is implemented by the joint venture partner. Iwokrama have produced an evaluation of the likely costs and incomes for the timber operation as part of the EIA process, however, this differs from the assessment and actual costs of the joint venture partner. Apart from direct timber harvesting there has not been an evaluation of costs incurred that are required to service the forest management operation (i.e. there is no clear cost centre for activities that might be attributed the forest operation as opposed to other IIC activities ). Iwokrama therefore currently have no basis upon which to evaluate productivity and efficiency. To some extent this is a direct consequence of the fact that harvesting has only recently commenced. However in the context of Iwokrama as a model for other forest managers in relation to demonstration of sustainable forest management including economic performance this is an important omission. CAR 2007.25.

Documentation shall be provided by the forest manager to enable monitoring and certifying organisations to trace each forest product from its origin, a process known as the "chain of custody." Monitoring chain of custody. In general terms there are good systems to monitor timber removal from site and sales. Invoices are issued by ITI. Invoices do include all details given under this indicator including provision for certificate code (not yet issued) Invoices will need to be adjusted accordingly upon receipt of FSC certificate code. CAR 2007.26. The results of monitoring shall be incorporated into the implementation and revision of the management plan. Incorporation of monitoring into plans. There is a review of survey and monitoring findings as part of the EIA and Environmental Forest Management Plan. Current monitoring protocols are being reviewed and implemented. Iwokrama will need to demonstrate that these monitoring results are incorporated into the next revision of the plan and in the management planning process.

While respecting the confidentiality of information, forest managers shall make publicly available a summary of the results of monitoring indicators, including those listed in Criterion 8.2. Public availability of monitoring. A summary of monitoring activities has been produced. This describes approaches, rationale, key activities and highlights findings. It notes collabortaive research and monitoring activities and that results are shared with other agencies. The document is available on the Iwokrama web page, it provides links to other associated documents, and notes that monitoring protocols are accessible. The document also describes collaborative research and monitoring activity outside the forest area in partnership with local communities. Assessment to determine the presence of the attributes consistent with High Conservation Value Forests will be completed, appropriate to scale and intensity of forest management. Assessment of HCVF attributes. The FSC definition described under Principle 9 has been adopted, and analysed using the ProForest Toolkit approach to criteria for evaluation (see definitions in Annex 7 of Woodmark Generic Standard adapted for use in Guyana). These are reviewed in Iwokrama document "High Conservation Values in Iwokrama". . The entire area is considered to be HCVF based on a combination of factors including: Iwokrama has been declared a Protected Area, it contains concentrations of threatened and endangered species (egs Jaguar, Giant otter, caiman), it contains endemic species, it is a large landscape level forest containing viable populations, it provides basic services in relation to watersheds, and meets traditional and cultural needs of local Amerindian communities. These have been sytematically reviewed.

The consultative portion of the certification process must place emphasis on the identified conservation attributes, and options for the maintenance thereof. Forest managers shall consult with relevant stakeholders on the identification of High Conservation Values and management options for any High Conservation attributes identified. Consultation on HCVF. Consultation has been carried out with national agencies and local communities, these are reported in zoning document, management planning documents, EIA, and participatory management sessions held with the local community. Consultation has included consideration of biodiversity values, landscape level services and community/cultural issues. The management plan shall include and implement specific measures that ensure the maintenance and/or enhancement of the applicable conservation attributes consistent with the precautionary approach. These measures shall be specifically included in the publicly available management plan summary. Maintenance of HCVF values and the precautionary approach. Management planning documents include consideration of the HCV attributes identified, this includes zoning, establishment of a Wilderness Preserve area, and management approaches to each of the attributes. Overall management is precationary in approach, intervention is anticipated in less than 30% of the overall forest area, RIL techniques minimise forest disturbance. In addition specific measures are identified for protection of particular attributes eg protection of water resources, protection of cultural values Annual monitoring shall be conducted to assess the effectiveness of the measures employed to maintain or enhance the applicable conservation attributes.

Annual monitoring of HCVF attributes. There is monitoring and a set of monitoring protocols has been established. Some of these have yet to be implemented. Note comments under 7.1 Objectives, and 8.1 Monitoring. There is scope to improve clarity of objectives, particularly in relation to biodiversity, and thereby associated monitoring. Use of the HCVF attribute assessment could be better used to inform the content and prioritisation of monitoring programmes. CAR 2007.28.

Principle 10 The management objectives of the plantation, including natural forest conservation and restoration objectives, shall be explicitly stated in the management plan, and clearly demonstrated in the implementation of the plan.

There are no plantation areas present within Iwokrama Forest. This Principle is therefore not applicable

4 4.1

ADMINISTRATIVE CONTEXT Context summary of the legislative, administrative and land use contexts in which the forest management enterprise operates Iwokrama International Centre for Rain Forest Conservation and Development (Iwokrama or the Centre) is an International Non-Government Organization (NGO) legally established in Guyana in 1996 under the Iwokrama Act, 1996 and governed by an International Board of Trustees (IBOT). Its mission is, "To promote the conservation and the sustainable and equitable use of tropical rain forests in a manner that will lead to lasting ecological, economic and social benefits to the people of Guyana and to the world in general, by undertaking research, training, and the development and dissemination of technologies. The responsibilities are to manage, conserve and develop the 371,000 hectares of tropical rain forest, known as The Amerindian Act, 1976 , administered by the Ministry of Amerindian Affairs, addresses the protection of property and legal proceedings on behalf of Amerindians and their employment. It includes a Schedule of 75 villages that have been granted land title. The boundaries of those titles are listed in the Schedule. Freehold title is vested in the Village Councils as being the elected representatives of these villages. A national consultation process is underway to amend the Act to take into account the contemporary context The Forests Act, 1952 regulates the use of state-owned forest resources through the Guyana Forestry Commission (GFC) that was established under the Forestry Commission Act No. 2 of 1979. Amendments to the two Acts have been developed through stakeholder consultations and they are awaiting passage through Parliament, the GFC Act recently passed through parliament and is with selecte committee. These amendments are intended to provide for effective and sustained management of Guyanas forests. GFC is responsible for granting Timber Sales Agreements (TSAs) and smaller-scale, short-term Wood Cutting Leases and State Forestry Concessions. ITI will respect the intent and terms of the practices and policies incorporated in the following documents: Code of Practice for Timber Harvesting (2002) which address major items such as: Planning Requirements; Exclusion Areas, Buffer Zones and other Protective Measures; Construction Works for Logging; Logging Operations; Post-Harvest Activities; Operational Hygiene; Camp Hygiene; Health and Safety; and, Evaluation. Forest Management Plan Guidelines (1999) National Standards for Forest Certification, from the Guyana National InitiativeAct, Forestthat is Overarching environmental protection stems that the Environmental Protection for 1996 Certification primarily implemented by the Environmental Protection Agency. The Act has broad application, stating: <any person or authority under any other written law, vested with power in relation to the environment shall defer to the authority of the Agency and shall request an environmental authorisation from the agency before approving or determining any matter..., and, where an environmental authorisation is required, directing the Agency and other institutions, to: "<take such steps as are necessary for the effective management of the natural environment so as to ensure conservation, protection and sustainable use of its natural resources; "...co-ordinate the environmental activities of all persons, organisations and agencies; "<to play a coordinating role in the preparation and implementation of cross-sectoral programmes of

Other aspects of the regulatory and institutional framework within which the ITI project is designed and will operate include: Other relevant legislative and regulatory instruments stemming from the Environmental Protection Act. The Mining Act and the Guyana Geology and Mines Commission (GGMC). The Ministry of Health and Labor, Occupational Health and Safety Department and the Occupational Safety and Health Act 1997. The Public Health Ordinance. The Pesticides and is committed to considering international policies of: In addition, Guyana Toxic Chemicals Control Act 2000. The Rio Declaration. The International Tropical Timber Organisation (ITTO), established under the International Tropical Timber Agreement, 1983. The Convention on Biological Diversity. The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) 1973. The Amazon Cooperation Treaty (TCA). Agenda 21, a 1992 UNCED Action Plan. The UNCED Framework Convention on Climate Change. The Convention on Wetlands 1975 - Ramsar The Iwokrama forest forms part of the Guiana shield tropical moist forests. The Iwokrama region is at the Southern border of this forest and is therefore relatively dry. The habitat changes to an open Savannah just outside the borders of the Iwokrama land holding. The area is almost entirely primary forest and has not been logged commercially in the past. The area has been inhabited at low density by indigenous peoples since shortly after their arrival in the Americas and has been mostly inaccessible due to the poor

5 5.1 5.1.1

5.1.2

5.2 5.2.1

5.2.2

5.2.3

5.2.4

5.3 5.3.1

5.3.2

5.3.3

5.3.4

5.3.5

5.3.6

5.4 5.4.1

5.4.2

5.4.3

5.4.4

5.4.5

5.4.6

5.5

5.6

5.7

5.8 5.8.1

5.8.2

5.9 5.9.1

5.9.2

5.9.3

5.9.4

5.9.5

5.10

5.11 .

THE FOREST GENERAL BACKGROUND ABOUT THE OPERATION Type of operation and year established Iwokrama International Centre for Rain Forest Conservation and Development (Iwokrama or the Centre) is an International Non-Government Organization (NGO) legally established in Guyana in 1996 under the Iwokrama Act, 1996 and governed by an International Board of Trustees (IBOT). Its mission is, "To promote the conservation and the sustainable and equitable use of tropical rain forests in a manner that will lead to lasting ecological, economic and social benefits to the people of Guyana and to the world in general, by undertaking research, training, and the development and dissemination of technologies. The The forest management unit was established under the Iwokrama Act of 1996. Between 1996 and 2006 significant work was carried out preparatory to the development of a commercially viable forestry business. During this period non timber based businesses were developed eg Ecotourism, and local Commercial harvesting commenced harvesting in February 2007. A business partner has been identified for this activity - Tigerwood Guyana Inc. Harvesting operations are designed to follow the Guyana Forestry Code of Practice and the principles and practices of Reduced Impact Logging. The forest has been

Ownership of the land, forest and forest management enterprise The land and forest resource has been ceded to the Iwokrama International Centre (IIC) under the Iwokrama Act. It is treated by the Forestry Department as a private forest holding and is not subject to royalty payments on timber extracted. Tenure under the act is in perpetuity. The forest management responsibility has been ceded by IIC to Iwokrama Timber Incorporated (ITI) a subsidiary of IIC in which IIC holds 76% of shares, The North Rupununi Development Board owns 15% of shares and the Fairview Community owns 9% of shares. ITI has in turn established Iwokrama Sustainable Timber Incorporated (ISTI) which is a joint venture company between ITI (51% shares) and Tiger Wood Guyana Inc (TGI) (49% shares). Tigerwood directly employs operational staff for harvesting and employs TGI is a wholly owned Guyanese company. It has been established specifically to provide an operational commercial partner for Iwokrama and has no other timber interests in Guyana. Chaiman of the board is Sir Shridath Ramphal GCMG, served 15 years as Secretary General of the Commonwealth and was President of IUCN. Board members include Ralph Ramkarran, lawyer and parliamentatrian; Kads Khan Chartered Accountant, and owner of Guyanese engineering business, and financial teaching institution, politician; Sir Ronald Saunders KCMG, previously High Commssioner to UK, and member of UNESCO board and Caribbean Financial Task Force to counter drug trafficking and money laundering; Tim Ashworth-Foster, based in Europe responsible for marketing and sales, with international timber trading experience in S America and SE Asia. TGI Employ a forest manager and assistant with long standing TENURE Forest Owner/managers tenure The land has been ceded to the Iwokrama International Centre under the Iwokrama Act. It is treated by the Forestry Department as a private forest holding and is not subject to royalty payments on timber extracted. Tenure under the act is in perpetuity. IIC has vested ownership in the timber and NTFPs in ITI

Third party tenure and use rights

There is a single community 'Fairview' which is located mainly within the FMU. This community is recognised as being composed of indigenous peoples but is of fairly recent origin. The community is characterised as a matrilineal settlement with men coming from outside of the community. The The Fairview Community has established legal title to 21,951 ha within the Iwokrama area. Iwokrama fully recognise this title. The Fairview Community has entered into a Co-management agreement with Iwokrama within which Iwokrama take the lead on organising harvesting operations. A joint management plan specific to this area has been under development and is due for completion at th eend of 2007. To the south of the FMU and occupying approximately the same area are the 15 communities of the North Rupununi. These communities are developing their own logging business on the southern border of the FMU. They regularly enter the forest of the FMU for the purpose of hunting and gathering. The total population of the region is approximately 4500 persons. Forest Owner/managers other activity or areas managed IIC conducts research in tropical forest management and specifically on the rare and endangered species of the Iwokrama Forest. Iwokrama International Centre also offers training in tropical forest management and ecology as well as personal development courses eg Ranger skills. Iwokrama has given concessions for tourism development in part of the forest, most importantly for a canopy walkway erected with donor aid. Land use history The land can be considered as primary forest since human impact has historically been low and there is no history of commercial logging in the past. Surveys of the forest have found no old tree stumps. SUMMARY OF FOREST MANAGEMENT Structure of management organisation Present responsibility for management resides with Dr. David Singh director general of Iwokrama International Centre. David Singh, Dr. Raquel Thomas (Director IIC), Dane Gobin (Director IIC and ITI) and Ken Rodney (Directors of ITI). Community Representative Rodney Davis is also Director ITI. Ken Rodney will have operational responsibility for forest management as Forest Manager IIC. At present there are no further employees in ITI since operations are subcontracted by way of agreement with operational partner TGI, together ITI and TGI have formed ISTI (see 5.1.2 above) with 51%:49% shares IIC is governed by an international board of trustees appointed by the Commonwealth Secretary General and the Government of Guyana. The Director General is the Chief Executive. Patron is HRH Prince of

Total management area and main divisions The area extends to 371,681 ha . Of this area c.50% is allocated as wilderness preserve and c.50% for sustainable use. Of the area allocated to sustainable use approximately 60% is suitable for timber production giving a net operable area of 108,992 ha. The remainder is unsuitable for a variety of reasons The Sustainable Use Area has in turn been divided into 5 main compartments between 20,011ha and 49,125ha. The aim is to work each of these in turn over a 60 year period commencing with the Essequibo

Each of the compartments is in turn sub-divided into a series of management units designed to provide practically operational areas based on the drainage network, these vary in size and shape according to topography and physical features but typically are a few hundred ha in size (28 units in Essequibo Compartment which covers 20,011ha). A five year timber harvesting plan has been prepared in which the aim is to work around two management units per year (overall 5641 ha in the first five years). The first five year plan includes management units 1 to 8 and 13. Each management unit is then organised in 100ha blocks based on a 1km grid each of which is worked in turn. There is a 100% inventory for each block prior to working and the location of each tree is plotted. Details are recorded on GIS and include species, volume estimate, grade. Trees that are available for harvest are identifed using a computer programme Forest composition and forest production The forest is very diverse in tree species with over 130 species known from the FMU. Of these 49 are considerded to be potentially commercially valuable and are included within the scope of the certificate It is the intention to harvest at a low intensity removing about 18.7m3 per ha during the first five years with an average of 20,000 m3 per year using a 60 year cutting cycle. This is equivalent to about to 0.18 m3/ha/yr over the net operabla area or 0.1m3/ha/yr for the sustainable use area and 0.05m3/ha/yr for the

Management objectives The broad management objective is laid out in the Iwokrama act as follows:"To promote the conservation and the sustainable and equitable use of tropical rain forests in a manner that will lead to lasting ecological, economic and social benefits to the people of Guyana and to the world in general, by undertaking research, training, and the development and dissemination of technologies. The Iwokrama Forest Forest Management Plan gives a Vision for the Iwokrama Forest - that it is a place where the Iwokrama Centre works with local people to conserve the natural and cultural heritage of the forest, to sustainably use the forest and to provide models for sustainable forest management and use of

Within this context ITI will seek to develop a sustainable business which offers substantial benefits to local stakeholders by means of employment in forestry and timber processing activities. The Environmental Impact Statement vol I gives Iwokrama's vision as "To promote the conservation and the sustainable and equitable use of tropical rain forests in a manner that will lead to lasting ecological, economic, and social benefits to the people of Guyana and to the world in general, by undertaking research, training, and the development and dissemination of technologies". Volume III gives General Objectives as "The JVC will be a global model for timber harvesting, demonstrating innovative governance Silviculture and/or forest management systems The silvicultural basis for forest management is low intensity selective harvesting. Compartments will be harvested once every sixty years. There is no intermediate silviculture planned at this stage. The silvicultural system relies on the assumption that the forest will recover to have substantially the same species and diameter classes at the start of the next cutting cycle in 60 yrs time. There is little or no species specific silvicultural knowledge of the trees in the Iwokrama Forest.

The yield selection is based on a minimum felling diameter criterion, a limit in the number of trees/ha that may be harvested and the market value of different species. Principal harvesting techniques Reduced Impact Logging (RIL) methods are used. This is based on individual tree selection. Creeper cutting is done to release the crown. Directional felling limits damage to residual tree. Extraction is by cable and winch to a skid patch from which a forwarder moves the tree to a landing. The crown and major limbs remain in field. The skid paths are designed and mapped before operations begin in order to minimise the length of skid path needed for extraction of the yield. There is a ten metre proximity rule

SUSTAINED YIELD Assumptions on which estimates are based Ovearll harvesting is limited to the Sustainable Use Area (SUA) which comprises 49.6% of the total forest area (50.4% of the area is Wilderness Preserve where no harvesting will occur). The net operable area accounts for 59.1% of the SUA resulting in only 29% of the total forest area identified for potential exploitation. A harvesting cycle of 60 years is clearly stated in the Environmental and Forest Management Plan. Minimum diameter felling criteria are given (above national norms). The expected level of harvesting is 20000m3. The GFC national norm for allowable cut is 20m3/ha, Iwokrama plan 18.7m3/ha At operational level harvesting limits are set by species with species abundance limiting the volume of that species available for harvest. In addition the RIL criteria including the 10m proximity rule ensure that With nett operable area of 108,992ha on 60 year cycle annual area would be 1,816ha. At GFC AAC of 20cu.m. /ha this would allow AAC of 36,300m3/yr. Actual planned production is 18.7m3/ha for the first 5 years. harvest also varies according to forest type and current standing volume by species. Initially Rate of production is planned at 20m3/ha but it is predicted to drop to 12m3/ha. Area harvested annually will increase in 5 year to maintain overall output. be harvested from 5641ha. Weighted average 18.7m3/ha/year In the first order plan period 100,000m3 will Source of data on which estimates are based Harvesting predicions are based on detailed inventory and set within limits that are accepted within Guyana. Harvesting plans are based on species specific data. RIL harvesting is intended to minimise impact upon the forest. At present there is relatively little data about the growth and silvicultural response of the forest post harvesting although Ter Steege et al. (2002) published a long term analysis of the effect of selective logging of greenheart. This indicates that where pressure on the species is high that the recovery is very poor and that an issue of relevance is the long term response of key commercial species to harvesting eg Greenheart, Purpleheart. Research on this aspect elsewhere in Guyana is not conclusive but there is the possibility or likelihood that abundance of some species will reduce by the end

Rationale for annual harvest in terms of volumes and species See 5.4.1 above. The proposed harvest has been set a very low level. The site is an ITTO pilot site for evaluating the sustainability of RIL techniques.

Actual historical production There is no historical production in this FMU.

Current production Harvesting commenced February 2007. Projected production average 20,000m3/yr.

Projected production 100,000m3 from 5641ha in the first five years.

ENVIRONMENT AND BIODIVERSITY The Iwokrama Forest has the highest species richness for fish (over 420 described so far) and bats (90) for any area this size in the world. It also has extraordinarily high bird diversity (over 500). This has also been identified as a global hotspot for several plant families, including Lecythidaceae and Chrysobalanaceae. The Iwokrama Ecosystem is located between Amazonian and Guianan flora and fauna. As a result, it contains high species richness and several species of animals that are threatened or extinct across most of The entire Forest is considered extremely rich in biodiversity as it is currently known to contain more than 1,250 species of plants, several of which are considered to be rare or even new . Further collecting is expected to increase this number to over 2000 species. The Sandy Plains and Terraces landforms, which comprise a large proportion of the NOA, provide the habitat for a number of vegetation types including Wallaba Forest, Dakama Forest, Muri scrub, Greenheart (Chlorocardium rodiei) mixed forest and others. They are found exclusively on soils composed principally of quartzite sand, but with various amounts of clay and loam. Four hundred and twenty fish species were recorded in the Burro-Burro, Siparuni, and Essequibo rivers in or adjoining the Forest. Four new species of fish were found. Large predators were present such as Arapaima (Arapaima gigas), Baiaras (Cynodontidae), Laolao and Blinka (Brachyplatystoma spp.), Siana (Pauliceea luetkeni), the Tiger Fish and Culit (Pseudoplatystoma spp.) and Dawalu (Ageneiosus spp.) in the rivers. These fish have been all but extirpated in many other areas through commercial over-fishing. Four hundred and seventy four bird species were recorded. There was an abundance of normally overhunted birds such as cracids (Crax alector) and tinamous (Tinamus spp.) and note was made of the One hundred and thirty species of mammals were recorded in the Forest. The diversity of bats in the Forest (86 species) is the highest recorded to date in South America. In addition to the high bat species richness, 20 of the 29 CITES protected species found in Guyana have been found in the Forest despite a depauperate primate fauna (only five species). Many of these larger mammals, including Jaguars

SOCIAL AND COMMUNITY ISSUES

There is one permanent Amerindian settlement within the forest area - Fairview Village - with a population of about 200. Firview has established legal title to 21,950ha within the Iwokrama forest and enetered into a co-management agreement with Iwokrrama over the management of this area. South of the forest there are 14 villages, with a population of around 3500 people, the nearest village being Surama (179 people) near th esouthern boundary. These villagers are represented by North Rupununi District Development Board (NRDDB). A representative from NRDDB sits on the Iwokrama International Board Iwokrama has carried out a number of development projects with local communites, including income generation projects, eco-tourism development, education and training (egs forest inventory, surveying, patrolling and monitoring, bio-prospecting, tour guiding, forest ranger skills. Iwokrama the largest employer in the area with many staff at the International Centre and working with the harvesting A key community related issue for Iwokrama will be whether local people as key stakeholders and customary tenants of the forest feel that they will derive an adequate and equable benefit from the SUMMARY OF MONITORING ACTIVITIES Iwokrama has invested significant staff time and resources into research and monitoring of the forest resource over the last ten years. There have been various studies and monitoring protocols proposed and implemented, and detailed Biophysical monitoring protocols have been prepared. A detailed and thorough review of monitoring is presented in a draft document "Iwokrama Integrated Monitoring Aspects monitored include: Routine monitoring of road use - 2 ranger stations, wildlife sightings, road/bridge/culvert condition; River monitoring - river level, wildlife sightings, mining encroachment; Airstrip monitoring - condition, litter, vegetation; Climatic - rain, humidity, temperature; Timber harvesting - impact monitoring for fauna and flora, pre harvest and post harvest inventory, PSPlots, proposed water quality testing; Research permanent sample plots; Phenology transects; Infrastructure monitoring and facilties - vistors, waste, security, illegal occupations, cleanliness, maintenance records, Energy consumption and solar power. There are proposals for socio economic indicatiors to be monitored

OTHER ACTIVITIES Summary of non forestry activities being undertaken within the management area There is subsistence agriculture on about 300ha around Fairview. Subsistence hunting and gathering throughout the FMU by indigenous peoples. Iwokrama are aware of the potential for mining in the area, and have control of these rights. Currently there is no mining within the forest and no plans for any. Iwokrama have noted illegal mining operations outside their boundary and taken action with regulatory authorities to see that these activities are The road which bisects the forest is currently a forest road. However it is on main route between north east Brazil and the coast at Georgetown (Lethem-Georgetown Road) there are plans to upgrade it to a highway. Iwokrama will not be in control of this process although its development may impact upon the forest and/or Iwokrama's monitoring and enforcement activity. Currently Iwokrama control access to the road by way of barriers, these are closed at night. Useage is monitored and vehicles passing noted.

Impacts

The impacts of the community activities are generally very low at the FMU level. The total subsistence population of the forest is approximatley 300 persons. About a further 3500 people live in the North Rupununu district.The impact of subsistence hunting is not well understood. The potential impact of the There is collaboration by Iwokrama and NRDDB on a current project Project Fauna, University of Hawaii. This project is looking at hunting impacts in several of the North Rupununi communities and includes Fair View village and Iwokrama. Information from this project will also provide vital

TRACKING, TRACING AND IDENTIFICATION OF PRODUCTS Key risk areas for mixing certified and non-certified products from the forest area Risk of mixing is low. Only FSC certified product will leave the forest. Whilst there may be scope for mixing after dimensioned timber is transported from the site this is considered low risk and would be outside the scope of this certificate (responsibility of joint venture partner under own COC certificate).

Control systems - Systems and Documents used to control material flow Log tags are issued by the GFC for each tree to be felled. Each tree is individually identified and numbered on the 100% inventory. Trees are felled according to species to satisfy particular orders. Upon felling each tree and stump is identified with GFC tag no and inventory number. Logs derived from each tree are also numbered. Dimension, volume and quality are recorded. Logs entering the sawmill are recorded in sawmilling records and out put volumes/dimensions recorded. Dimensioned timber produced is numbered using the original log tag number and the tag attached to timber packs. Lorry collects ordered timber and species, quantity, dimensions loaded are recorded, delivery documents and

Identification of certified forest products Dimensioned timber produced is numbered using the original log tag number and the tag attached to

Point at which scope of joint forest and chain of custody ends At stump.

Secondary Processing by Forest Manager On site sawmilling by Joint Venture Partner - Subject of separate Chain of Custody evaluation. Forest Areas or processes excluded from scope of certification On site sawmilling by Joint Venture Partner - Subject of separate Chain of Custody evaluation.

MAP(S) Detailed GIS maps are held by forest managers. Copies EIA held by Woodmark includes maps.

6.0 6.1

6.2

6.3

6.4

6.5

6.6

6.7

6.8

6.9

6.10

6.11

6.12

6.13

6.14

Ref

FSC 1.3 4.1 4.3

FSC 2.2 3.1

FSC 4.4 6.1

FSC 5.6

P7 P8

6.15

FIRST SURVEILLANCE Surveillance Assessment dates 25th to 30th January 2009 Estimate of person days to complete surveillance assessment 20 days (including preparation/stakeholder consultation) Surveillance Assessment team The assessment team consisted of: 1) Dr Michael Scott. Dr Scott has B.Soc.Sc Sociology, M.A. International Studies, and Ph.D Social Science and Administration. He has over twenty years, professional accomplishments in teaching and research at the national, regional and international levels in a range of areas relating to governance, social environment and development, institutional building and public policy and has participated in FSC evaluations in Guyana. Guyanese local auditor. Dr Scott provided expertise in social, community, human 2) Dr. Paulette Bynoe. Dr Bynoe has a BA Geography, M.Phil Environmental Education, and Ph.D Ecotourism, Institutions and Livelihoods: A Study of North Rupununi, Guyana. She has Sixteen years professional accomplishment as a Senior Environmental Officer, is currently Acting Director of the School of Earth and Environmental Sciences of the University of Guyana, Lecturer II, and an International Environmental Consultant in: environmental education and training, environmental management and policy formulation at the international, regional and national levels. Dr Bynoe has lived with communities 3) Kevin Jones. Kevin has a B.Sc. Ecological Science, M.Sc. Forestry and is a Member of the UK Institute of Chartered Foresters. He has experience of managing woodlands and forests for nature conservation, community and production objectives. He has been carrying out FSC forest and chain of custody assessments worldwide since 1996 and has managed the Woodmark FSC certification programme since Team members c.v.s are held on file. In addition FSC Accreditation Services International were auditing performance of the Woodmark team. Stakeholder consultation on behalf of ASI was co-ordinated locally by Dr Gary Clarke; the lead auditor on behalf of ASI was Simon Armstrong who was present throughout and led the audit on behalf of ASI. Assessment process 25th Jan 2009. Iwokrama head office Georgetown. Opening meeting, introductions, clarification of roles (FSC ASI, Woodmark auditors), confirmation of scope, review of activities in previous year. Review of documents including Joint Venture agreements, accounts, budgets, community payments, licences, HR and training Meeting Vanda Radzik. Discussion of social and stakeholder issues. Community benefit. 26th Jan 2009. Travel to Iwokrama forest (by road). Discussion of management planning, monitoring, research, training. Presentation on forest management operations and harvesting. Environmental Forestry Management Plan. 27th Jan 2009. Site visit mill site. Review development of harvesting, milling, site development. Inspection and discussion of health and safety management. Employee interviews (inc contracts, terms and conditions, Harvesting sites MUK41 Block K836 current felling and harvesting observed. MU5 Block E790 previous years harvesting observed. Harvested and retained trees noted, tags followed through to management records, maps, tag records. Roading inspected - constructed previous year and planned, for current year.

Inspectors review meeting 28th Jan 2009 Permanent sample plots inspected. Roading plans and procedures reviewed and checked on site. Review of harvesting, and post harvest analysis. Staff interviews, review of Medical issues, review of chemical/fuel use/storage. Monitoring programmes and records reviewed. Visit to Fairview - follow up of community issues. Butterfly farming project visited. Stakeholder meeting held with Fairview community (c. 20 villagers present). Travel to Surama - meeting with community representatives - overnight at eco cabins community run 29th Jan 2009 Travel to Annai - Stakeholder meeting held with NRDDB. Visit to Bina Hill Institute. Return travel to Georgetown (flight) Stakeholder phone calls Inspectors review meeting 30th Jan 2009 Iwokrama head office Georgetown - Close out meeting, review of previous CARs, Issues arising and non compliances noted. Review of Process. Thanks due to all Iwokrama and TGI staff and community

Stakeholder consultation Stakeholders contacted at main assessment were contacted again by email/mail in December 2008/January 2009. In addition stakeholders were contacted in the field during the audit, with particular attention given to meeting with local Amerindian communities and their representatives. Issues raised by stakeholders are considered under Issues below in this section. Observations are recorded in the Standard and Checklist Review of corrective actions Action taken in relation to previously issued conditions is reviewed and given in Section 2 CARs of this Justification for selection of items and places inspected The assessment covered all FSC Principles and Criteria, with each team member taking a lead responsibility for particular criteria according to their expertise and experience. All previously issued CARs were evaluated. Documents and management planning documents were reviewed at head office in The harvesting operation which had only recently commenced at the time of the main assessment was reviewed as this has introduced the most recent and significant changes to forest management and related impacts. Field visits concentated on areas that had been harvested in the last year and where active The newly constructed mill site was visited, workers independently interviewed, facilities inspected. Meetings were held with local indigenous people and their representatives to gain direct stakeholder input and assist evaluation of the social impacts of the operation.

Tracking, tracing and identification of products

Log and timber production records, delivery documents and invoices were inspected at Iwokrama head office in Georgetown, at the Field station, and on the mill site. Production records were inspected, and internal sawmill chain of custody (physical identification, production and stock records) and management of log tags reviewed. Control was generally good with limited opportunity for mixing or confusion of product as all timber is milled on site by joint venture partner. Individual trees are controlled from stump to mill site and Tag control from log to sawn product was good. Issues requiring correction/improvement

Secondary Processing by Forest Manager Processing is by Joint Venture Partner - Tigerwood Guyana Inc (TGI) who mill all product on site. TGI chain of custody is the subject of a seperate chain of custody report. Standard

The forest was evaluated against Version 2.1 of the Woodmark Generic Standard Adapted for use in Guyana prepared September 2007. There were no changes to this standard since the main
A copy of the standard is available at www.soilassociation.org/forestry Adaptations/Modifications to standard There were no changes to the standard used in the previous assessment Confirmation of scope The assessment team reviewed the current scope of the certificate in terms of FSC certified forest area and products being produced. There was no change since the previous evaluation. Changes to management situation The assessment team reviewed the management situation. No fundamental changes to the management situation were noted in terms of management structure or ownership. A new Director has been appointed since the main assessment. There were also a notable number of staff changes. The Joint Venture Partner operating the harvesting and sawmilling enterprise has increased is operation substantially since the main Results of surveillance assessment Results of the surveillance assessment are recorded in the standard and checklist Annex 1 and any Noncompliances identified are given in Section 2 CARs of this report. See also Issues arising below. Issues arising Where an issue was difficult to assess or contradictory evidence was identified this is discussed in the section below as an Issue and the conclusions drawn given. Issue

Employment conditions. Criteria 1.3, 4.1, 4.3 relate to ILO requirements, Human Resources (HR) and employment conditions. It is noted that there have been a number of staff changes within Iwokrama. More substantially there has been a major recruitment drive to facilitate the expanding timber and milling operation. Whilst HR policies exist and have been jointly developed, the rate of change has resulted in some of these being overlooked or incompletely implemented. FSC places an emphasis upon protecting workers rights and it is important that these aspects are comprehensively reviewed and implemented for all workers - both Iwokrama employees and all workers employed by the joint venture partner. A series Community resources and free and informed consent. Within the wider community there is generally poor understanding of the economics of the timber operation and consequently a limited basis for the communities themselves to evaluate whether they are receiving appropriate payment for use of the forest resource. Consultation with community representatives suggested that they are aware of this whilst at the same time recognising limits to their own capacity to deal with such issues. A consistent theme throughout consultation with communites was that they recognised and appreciated the full range of benefits that derive from working with Iwokrama, and that they saw beyond the timber operation alone as A further related issue is that Iwokrama is considering how it may market the wider environmental services of the forest - it is not clear that this has been discussed with local communities, nor whether there has been consideration within Iwokrama of how such revenues might benefit local people. Such considerations should be at the core of Iworama's thinking as it further develops. CARs 2007.05, 2007.37 Social and Environmental Impacts. Criterion 4.4 relates to evaluation of social impact, and Criterion 6.1 relates to assessment of environmental impacts. Iwokrama have carried out extensive and ongoing consultation with local communities and produced an Environmental Forest Management Plan which incorporates assessment of environmental impacts. However the recent development of the mill site goes beyond the originally envisaged milling arrangements which included two mobile mills processing 6000cu.m. per year. The current development includes 5 mills plus chainsaw milling, milling in excess of 20,000cu.m per year, a large site for the camp with full facilities (canteen, accomodation, communal buildings, office, playing field) and which it is envisaged will accommodate more than 100 workers. The assessments of social and environmental impact do not refelect the scale of change that this will bring to The mill site development has potentially profound implications for local indigenous people, both Positive impacts could include improved access to facilities and services, provision of employment, development of anciliary businesses. The means by which such opportunities should be best managed do not appear to have been evaluated. For example, development of employment terms and conditions that are compatible with Amerindian culture could have notable positive effects for local communities, but there appears to have been little consideration of this or consultation with local villagers in relation to this. Stakeholder consultation by Woodmark indicated that communities would welcome discussion regarding working terms and conditions as current arrangements make it difficult for them to consistently support Negative impacts could include some of the following, many of which were raised with Woodmark during stakeholder consultation : negative impacts of rapid introduction of a cash economy upon traditional livelihoods, alchoholism, prostitution, sexual harassment, increase in sexually transmitted diseases, impacts upon natural resources (eg clean water), impacts upon services (eg health care provision), demand for food (eg hunting bushmeat). These potential impacts have not been systematically

Iwokrama has invested a decade in building realtionships with local communities and working with them on socio-economic development projects. This represents substantial "social capital", the rapid development of the mill site carries with it a significant risk of undermining this investment and established trust if the local community begins to perceive negative impacts. It is therefore in Iwokrama's interest to ensure that a systematic consideration of social impacts be carried out to a) maximise the potential positive benefits to the local community and b) to identify, minimise, manage, and mitigate In a similar vein, the impacts upon the environment of the mill site, which is the single biggest site disturbing operation in recent years, should consider the positive and negative impacts, and describe New Major Conditions 2009.11 and 2009.16 are given to address these issues. Sustained yield. FSC Criterion 5.6 relates to rate of harvest. The issue of sustainability in relation to particular species, particularly Greenheart and Purpleheart, were raised as issues at main assessment and again at this surveillance. This was considered at main assessment, a number of references were consulted including,ter Steege et al 2002 Forest Ecology and Management, which reviews the effects of prolonged logging (over 75 years) upon species composition with particular reference to Greenheart. The findings provide a mixed picture of the effects of logging but suggest that under prolonged harvesting, merchantable Greenheart populations may be liable to reduction and it calls into question the sustainability of a Greenheart based forest sector in Guyana. The situation at Iwokrama is likely to be different to the historic review by ter Steege et al for several reasons including though not limited to Nevertheless Woodmark made the suggestion in CAR 2007.14 that there is the possibility or likelihood that the abundance of some species will reduce by the end of the cutting cycle. It appears that at least

partly in response to this observation Iwokrama have revised the Environmental Management Plan to FSC Guidelines for Certification Bodies provides guidance upon interpretation of Single species sustainability (Subject 2 "The FSC Secretariat considers that it would be counterproductive to insist that companies slavishly work to ensure single species sustained yield, when the implication is a high level of immediate environmental impact, a high financial cost, and unknown longterm environmental impacts. In situations in which logging is likely to lead to long term changes in species and size-class distribution it is essential that representative areas, and areas of particular conservation value, are protected from Where there are doubts as to the impact of logging on long term yields of forest products it becomes especially important to implement the monitoring requirements of Principle 8." Review of harvesting at Iwokrama over the past year indicates that stands contain an average of 15.6 stems of Greenheart/ha. Of these average removal has been 2.8 stems/ha. i.e. a substantial number of merchantable stems remain for the future. In addition, in terms of the ecology of the forest, nonmerchantable trees (eg hollow) are not included in this assessment, such trees remain as mature seed bearing individuals that will remain in the stand to senescence. Data also shows that the species is represented in size classes below the merchantable size with 66% of individuals being below 45cm - this is in contrast to the ter Steege et al findings that note a substantial absence of sub mature trees in the population structure. Another key difference in the Iwokrama case is that a wide range of species is considered as economic (currently 13 main species), this changes the cost:benefit economic analysis of Having reviewed the situation Woodmark's conclusion remains that harvesting appears to be sufficiently precautionary in nature and that overall there is unlikely to be a major negative impact upon the ecology of the forest. Given the rate of harvesting in relation to the forest as a whole there is opportunity to monitor the effects of the impact of harvesting - this is a unique opportunity to study these effects and one Furthermore the approach is consistent with FSC guidance quoted above as around 70% of the forest will remain unaffected by harvesting in the long term. CAR 2007.14 was designed to ensure that the monitoring aspects are addressed, this work has not been done and the CAR remains open (upgraded).

No further CARs are proposed at this stage, though Woodmark will continue to monitor the consequences of harvesting and Iwokrama's analysis of impacts upon different species. Two minor additional concerns are raised as a consequence of this audit. Firstly, there are plans to re-enter areas already worked. Iwokrama management proposals refer to single entry harvesting with long return periods that underpin the assumptions regarding long term impacts of harvesting upon yield and forest dynamics. The re-entry is to target species not previously harvested, however, unless this is managed carefully there could be additional (collateral) impacts. A one-off rentry as part of the learning process near the beginning of the harvesting operation may be acceptable, but should not be allowed to become Secondly, one greenheart stump was noted below the 45cm minimum harvest limit. The explanation given for this was that the tree had been damaged during harvesting, that this tree was felled, and in its place another retained (that had been intended for felling) in order to maintain the 10m proximity rule. Nevertheless Iwokrama need to guard carefully against removal of sub mature trees in order ensure Management planning and monitoring.Principle 7 relates to Management Planning and Principle 8 relates to Monitoring. The two are, or should be, closely linked. At Main assessment management plans and moniotoring protocols had been prepared, but both required further work to be fully coherent. Conditions were issued to ensure compliance. However, since the main assessment there has been little progress with updating of the Iwokrama Forest Management Plan, and plans to complete monitoring protocols have not been completed. If Iwokrama is to avoid drift in its mission, and maintain a clear vision of what it wishes to achieve across the full range of its activities, these aspects now need to be comprehensively addressed. Given the rapid rate of development with regard to harvesting and Surveillance report approval Report approved by Nicholas Underhay Soil Association Certification Ltd.

e species sustainability (Subject 2.11):

7.0

7.1

7.2

7.4

7.5

7.5

7.6

7.7

7.8

7.9

7.10

7.11

7.12

7.13

7.14

7.15

Corrective Action Review July October 2009 During the 2009 S1 assessment a number of CARs were raised to Major status with 3 or 6 month close out dates. Additional work was therefore requried to evaluate action against these CARs. This included desk review of submissions made followed by a field assessment to verify the desk assessment and additional work to check for ongoing implementation in the field and consult with local communities. This CAR Assessment dates Desk assessments May to August 2009. Field visit 26th to 29th October 2009. Estimate of person days to complete CAR assessment 20 days (including preparation/stakeholder consultation) Surveillance Assessment team The assessment team consisted of: Kevin Jones. Kevin has a B.Sc. Ecological Science, M.Sc. Forestry and is a Member of the UK Institute of Chartered Foresters. He has experience of managing woodlands and forests for nature conservation, community and production objectives. He has been carrying out FSC forest and chain of custody assessments worldwide since 1996 and has managed the Woodmark FSC certification programme since Team members c.v.s are held on file.

Assessment process 26th Oct 2009. a.m. Travel to Iwokrama field station by road head office Georgetown. p.m. Opening meeting, introductions, confirmation of scope, review of activities to address CARs. Review of documents including Joint Venture agreements, accounts, budgets, community payments, licences, HR and training 27th Oct 2009. a.m. Field vist to mill site. Review of fuel/chemical management, road building, operational protocol implementation, health and safety management and documents, fire control measures, review of employment contracts and training records, review of pay records, inspection of insurance documents, a.m. Visit to active harvesting site, review of health and safety equipment and management, interviews with employees regarding pay, contracts, conditions and training. p.m. Visit to Fairview community - consultation regarding Fairview management plan, discussion of consultation by Iwokrama, discussion of relationship with TGI, discussion of social impacts, discussion of availability of financial information, understanding and benefit sharing. p.m. Review of social impact assessment, environmental impact assessment, review of management plan, review of monitoring, review of post harvest analysis. 28th Oct 2009. a.m. Travel to Bina Hill. Meeting with NRDDB. Discussion of status of NRDDB, consultation by Iwokrama, review of legal support, discussion of availability of financial information, understanding and benefit sharing, discussion of relations with TGI and social impacts of harvesting. p.m. Flight Georgetown. Review of centrally held HR documents, policy documents, budgets, invoicing. Close out meeting with Iwokrama and TGI senior managers. Review of all CARs due for close out 29th Oct 2009 a.m. Close out meeting with Iwokrama Director. Depart.

Stakeholder consultation Meetings were held with Fairview Community, NRDDB. Discussions were held with TGI. Issues discussed and observations are recorded are in sheet 2 CAR observations.

Review of corrective actions Action taken in relation to previously issued conditions is reviewed and given in Section 2 CARs of this Justification for selection of items and places inspected This was an additional assessment focused solely on previously issued CARs with an emphasis on The sites visited reflected issues raised in CARs eg harvesting site for health and safety implementation, mill site for fuel management and camp conditions. There was an emphasis on direct consultation with local communities to gain an understanding ofwith local indigenous people and their representatives to There was an emphasis on direct consultation social issues. gain direct stakeholder input and assist evaluation of the social impacts of the operation.

Tracking, tracing and identification of products There was not a detailed review of chain of custody issues. Management of tags was reviewed and

Secondary Processing by Forest Manager Processing is by Joint Venture Partner - Tigerwood Guyana Inc (TGI) who mill all product on site. TGI chain of custody is the subject of a seperate chain of custody report. Standard

The forest was evaluated against Version 2.1 of the Woodmark Generic Standard Adapted for use in Guyana prepared September 2007. There were no changes to this standard since the main
A copy of the standard is available at www.soilassociation.org/forestry Adaptations/Modifications to standard There were no changes to the standard used in the previous assessment Confirmation of scope The assessment team reviewed the current scope of the certificate in terms of FSC certified forest area and products being produced. There was no change since the previous evaluation. Changes to management situation The assessment team reviewed the management situation. No fundamental changes to the management situation were noted in terms of management structure or ownership. There were some staff changes. The Joint Venture Partner operating the harvesting and sawmilling enterprise has maintained it's operation Results of surveillance assessment

Results of the CAR assessment are recorded in Sheet 2 CARs. Issues arising Issues are discussed in Sheet 2 CARs Surveillance report approval Report approved by Nicholas Underhay Soil Association Certification Ltd.

ANNEX 1 WOODMARK GENERIC CHECKLIST ADAPTED FOR USE IN GUYANA V2.1 FSC ref 1

1.1 1.1.1 MA

S1

S2 S3 S4 1.1.2 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 1.1.3

MA

S1

S2 S3 S4 1.2 1.2.1 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 1.3 1.3.1 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 1.3.2

MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 1.3.3 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 1.3.4 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 1.3.5 MA

S1

S2 S3 S4

1.3.6 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 1.3.7 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 1.3.8 MA S1 S2 S3 S4

1.4 1.4.1 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 1.4.2 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 1.5 1.5.1 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4

1.5.2 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 1.5.3 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 1.5.4 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 1.5.5 MA S1 S2 S3

S4

1.6 1.6.1 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 1.6.2 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 2 2.1 2.1.1 MA

S1

S2 S3 S4

2.1.2 MA

S1

S2 S3 S4 2.1.3 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 2.1.4 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 2.1.5 MA

S1 S2

S3 S4 2.2 2.2.1 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 2.2.2 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 2.2.3 MA

S1

S2 S3 S4 2.2.4

MA S1 S2 S3 S4 2.2.5 MA

S1 S2

S3 S4 2.2.6

MA S1 S2 S3 S4 2.2.7

MA S1 S2 S3 S4 2.3

2.3.1 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 2.3.2

MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 2.3.3

MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 2.3.4 MA

S1

S2 S3 S4 2.3.5 MA S1 S2

S3 S4 2.3.6

MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 2.3.7 MA S1 S2 S3 S4

3.1 3.1.1

MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 3.1.2 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 3.1.3 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 3.1.4 MA S1

S2 S3 S4 3.1.5 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 3.1.6 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 3.1.7 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 3.2

3.2.1

MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 3.2.2 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 3.2.3 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 3.2.4

MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 3.3 3.3.1a

MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 3.3.1b MA S1 S2 S3 S4 3.3.2 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 3.3.3 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 3.3.4 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 3.4

3.4.1 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 3.4.2

MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 3.4.3 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 4

4.1 4.1.1 MA

S1

S2 S3 S4 4.1.2 MA

S1

S2 S3 S4 4.1.3 MA

S1

S2 S3 S4 4.1.4 MA S1 S1 S2 S3

S4 4.1.5 MA

S1

S2 S3 S4 4.1.6 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4

4.2 4.2.1 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4

4.2.2 MA S1

S2 S3 S4 4.2.3 MA

S1

S2 S3 S4 4.2.4 MA

S1

S2 S3 S4

4.2.5 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 4.2.6 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 4.2.7 MA

S1

S2 S3 S4 4.2.8

MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 4.2.9

MA

S1 S2 S3 S4

S4 4.3 4.3.1 MA

S1

S2 S3 S4 4.3.2 MA

S1

S2 S3 S4 4.3.3 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 4.4

4.4.1

MA

S1

S2 S3 S4 4.4.2 MA

S1

S2 S3 S4 4.4.3

MA S1 S2 S3 S4 4.5

4.5.1 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 4.5.2 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 4.5.3 MA

S1 S2

S3 S4 4.5.4 MA S1

S2 S3 S4 5

5.1 5.1.1 MA

S1

S2 S3 S4 5.1.2 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 5.1.3 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 5.1.4 MA S1 S2

S3 S4 5.1.5 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 5.2 5.2.1 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 5.2.2 MA

S1

S2

S3 S4 5.2.3 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 5.3 5.3.1a MA S1 S2 S3 S4 5.3.1b MA S1 S2 S3 S4 5.3.2 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 5.3.3 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 5.3.4

MA S1 S2 S3 S4 5.3.5 MA

S1

S2 S3 S4 5.4 5.4.1

MA S1 S2 S3 S4 5.4.2 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 5.4.3 MA

S1 S2 S3

S4 5.4.4 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 5.5 5.5.1 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 5.5.2 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 5.5.3 MA S1 S2 S3

S4 5.5.4 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 5.5.5 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 5.6 5.6.1 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 5.6.2 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 5.6.3 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 5.6.4

MA

S1

S2 S3 S4

5.6.5 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 6

6.1

6.1.1

MA

S1

S2 S3 S4 6.1.2

MA

S1

S2 S3 S4 6.2a 6.2.1 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 6.2.2 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 6.2.3 MA

S1 S2

S3 S4 6.2b 6.2.4 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 6.2.5 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 6.2.6 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 6.2.7 MA S1 S2 S3

S4 6.2.8 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 6.2.9 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 6.2c 6.2.10 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 6.2.11 MA S1

S2 S3 S4 6.3

6.3.1 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 6.3.2 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 6.3.3 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 6.3.4 MA S1 S2

S3 S4 6.3.5 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 6.3.6 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 6.3.7 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 6.3.8 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 6.3.9

MA S1 S2 S3 S4 6.4 6.4.1 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 6.5a 6.5.1 MA

S1

S2 S3 S4

6.5.2

MA S1 S2 S3 S4 6.5.3 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 6.5b 6.5.4

MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 6.5.5 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 6.5.6 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 6.5.7 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 6.5c 6.5.8 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4

6.5.9

MA S1 S2 S3 S4 6.5.10 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 6.5.11 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 6.5.12 MA

S1 S2 S3

S4 6.5.13 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 6.6a 6.6.1 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 6.6.2

MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 6.6.3 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 6.6.4 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 6.6.5 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 6.6.6 MA S1 S2 S3

S4 6.6b

6.6.7 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 6.6.8 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 6.6.9 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 6.6c 6.6.10 MA S1 S2 S3 S4

6.6.11 MA

S1

S2 S3 S4 6.6.12 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 6.6.13 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 6.6.14 MA S1 S2 S3 S4

6.6.15 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 6.6.16 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 6.6.17 MA S1 S2 S3 S4

6.7 6.7.1 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 6.7.2 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 6.7.3 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 6.7.4 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 6.8 6.8.1 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 6.8.2 MA S1 S2 S3

S4 6.8.3 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 6.9 6.9.1 MA S1 S2 S3 S4

6.9.2 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 6.9.3 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 6.10

6.10.1

MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 7

7.1a 7.1.1 MA

S1

S2 S3 S4 7.1b(i) 7.1.2 MA S1

S2 S3 S4 7.1.3 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 7.1.4 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 7.1.5 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 7.1.6

MA

S1 S2

S3 S4 7.1b(ii) 7.1.7 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 7.1.8a MA S1 S2 S3 S4 7.1.8b MA S1 S2 S3 S4 7.1.9 MA S1 S2 S3 S4

7.1c 7.1.10 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 7.1.11

MA S1 S2 S3 S4 7.1d 7.1.12a

MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 7.1.12b MA

S1 S2 S3 S4

7.1e 7.1.13a MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 7.1.13b MA S1 S2 S3 S4 7.1.13c MA S1 S2 S3 S4 7.1f 7.1.14

MA

S1

S2 S3 S4 7.1.15 MA S1

S2 S3 S4 7.1.g 7.1.16 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 7.1h 7.1.17

MA S1 S2 S3 S4 7.1.18 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 7.1.19 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4

7.2 7.2.1 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 7.2.2

MA S1 S2 S3 S4 7.2.3 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 7.2.4 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 7.3 7.3.1 MA S1 S2

S3 S4 7.3.2 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 7.3.3 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 7.3.4 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 7.3.5 MA S1 S2 S3 S4

7.3.6 MA S1

S2 S3 S4 7.3.7 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 7.4 7.4.1

MA

S1 S2 S3 S4

8.1

8.1.1 MA

S1

S2 S3 S4 8.1.2

MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 8.1.3 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 8.1.4 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4

8.2a 8.2.1 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 8.2b 8.2.2 MA

S1

S2 S3 S4 8.2.3 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 8.2c 8.2.4

MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 8.2.5a

MA S1 S2 S3 S4 8.2.5b MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 8.2d 8.2.6a MA

S1

S2 S3 S4 8.2.6b MA S1 S2 S3 S4 8.2.7 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 8.2e 8.2.8 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 8.2.9

MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 8.3 8.3.1

MA

S1

S2 S3 S4 8.3.2 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 8.3.3

MA

S1

S2 S3 S4

8.4 8.4.1 8.4.1 MA

S1

S2 S3 S4 8.5 8.5.1 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 9

9.1 9.1.1

MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 9.1.2 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 9.1.2 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 9.2 9.2.1 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4

9.3

9.3.1 MA S1 S2 S3 S4 9.3.2 MA

S1 S2 S3 S4

9.3.3 S1 S2 S3 S4 S4 9.4 9.4.1

MA

S1 S2 S3 S4 10

ANNEX 1 WOODMARK GENERIC CHECKLIST ADAPTED FOR USE IN GUYANA V2.1 Criteria/Norm

Score

FSC PRINCIPLE #1: COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS AND FSC PRINCIPLES Forest management shall respect all applicable laws of the country in which they occur, and international treaties and agreements to which the country is a signatory, and comply with all FSC Principles and Criteria. Forest management shall respect all national and local laws and administrative requirements.

3.6667

There is no evidence of outstanding claims of non-compliance with national and local laws and administrative requirements related to forest management. The EIA report contains a lsit of the applicable laws. There were no indications of non compliance from regulatory bodies. Auditors should confirm that the N conditions to the EIA have been adhered to at the main inspection. No evidence to suggest adherance to conditions of Environmental Permit obtained. Annual plan of operations approved by GFC. Sawpit licence in place. Mill site plans submitted to EPA. Log tracking/tagging being implemented. Conditions of Environmental Permit not yet fully adhered to e.g. water monitoring - equipment ordered to facilitate this and work planned. N

Forest managers demonstrate awareness of relevant codes of practice, guidelines or agreements and have in place a mechanism that facilitates access to legal & supporting documents for both operational & regulatory staff (GNIFCd3 1.1.2) . Managers have good knowledge of codes of practice. National legislation and codes of practice have been systematically reviewed and are listed in internal Y documents which are available to staff. Staff have received training. The Environmental Forest Management plan includes a documented review of requirements. Staff interviewed demonstated awareness of the regulatory environment. (However, compliance with the conditions of the Environmental Permit and approval of the Forest Management Plan by the EPA and GFC respectively was notably inadequate). There have been a number of staff changes. New staff interviewed demonstrated good knowledge of relevant regulatory requirements. Y

There is compliance with the spirit of any relevant codes of practice, guidelines or agreements.

It is the intention that all forest management follows these codes of practice. All staff interviewed demonstrated good awareness of the content of codes of N practice. Training records demonstrated that training had been given, including Reduced Impact Logging for operators. The CoManagement Agreement between IIC and NRDDB expired on December 31, 2006. There was no evidence of extension or renewal at the time of audit pending reconstitution of NRDDB as a Council . Good awareness of codes of practice among staff, training records demonstrate ongoing training. Collaborative Management Agreement with NRDBB has Y been reviewed and renewed, consultation with NRDDB demonstrated good co-operation in renegotiating agreement (NRDDB had legal representation). 2007.33 closed March 2009.

All applicable and legally prescribed fees, royalties, taxes and other charges shall be paid. Forest managers provide evidence that applicable fees, royalties, taxes and other applicable charges have been paid. Discusions with GFC indicate that Iwokrama forest is treated as private land thus that no royalty is payable. Iwokrama is exempt from payment of duties. Y Financial documents inspected demonstrated that other charges were paid. Relevant compliance includes tax payment (investing savings into conservation monitoring), environmental permit, etc. Accounts inspected, financial audit statement confirms financial good standing, consultation gave no indication of any non payments. Y

In signatory countries, the provisions of all binding international agreements such as CITES, ILO Conventions, ITTA, and Convention on Biological Diversity, shall be respected. Forest managers respect CITIES provisions. Forest managers are aware of CITIES. They have identified and documented CITES species as part of the EIA process. Forest rangers work in conjunction with the EPA wildlife section to monitor traded wildlife passing through the Iwokrama forest. Ongoing monitoring at ranger stations. Evidence of training in relation to CITIES.

Y Y

Forest managers implement respect ILO provisions appropriate to their region.. Implementation of the following ILO conventions is a minimum requirement for certification : 29, 87, 97, 98, 100, 105, 111, 131, 138, 141, 142, 143, 155, 169, 182, ILO Code of Practice on Safety and Health in Forest Work, Recommendation 135, Minimum Wage Fixing Recommendation, 1970.

Forest managers have reviewed ILO conventions and provided training to staff in relation to employment rights. Currently there is no union Y representation in the organisation (TGI & IIC) however union membership, free association and collective bargaining are open options if wanted by employees. In practice this appears unlikely to happen. Staff and contractors interviewed demonstrated awareness of rights though confirmed that they were not union members. In so far as Iwokrama remains an entity with special status which the Iwokrama Act provides, the issue of Union representation does not apply. However, the status of TGI's staff in relation to this scenario is unclear. Refer to organogram. No non compliances noted in relation to Iwokrama. However, methods of hiring, lack of contracts, and terms and conditions of employment for TGI workers non-compliant with employment see also criteria 4.1, 4.2, 4.3 N

No child labour is used Inspection of Human Resources documents noted no child labour. Site inspection and interview demonstrated that all employees and contractors involved Y in potentially hazardous operations were over the age of 18. Employees and contractors interviewed - none noted below 18 years of age.

National minimum wage provisions are adhered to. Human resources documents were inspected, including employment contracts and evidence of payment. National Minimum wage at time of inspection G$26,069/month. Minimum paid by Iwokrama G$27,000to 32,000. Most employees were on scales higher than this. Some trainees were on a lower scale during their training period this is consistent with national employment legislation. Iwokrama staff salaries in compliance with national minimum wage requirements. However some TGI employees did not have contracts and it was suggested during interview that some rates of pay were below national minimum wage.

There is no forced labour or debt bondage. Employees were interviewed. There was no evidence of forced labour or debt bondage. In general Iwokrama was seen as a good employer.

No evidence within Iwokrama staff, although staff are required to pay for their transport costs to the field station. Terms of appointment for some TGI N employees was unclear, as no contracts were in place for some, and some employees interviewed were unclear of their terms and conditions of employment. Food and provisions supplied by TGI were supplied at a cost which was deducted from wages, this is in effect a monopoly supply as workers have no other practical supply option available. Rates for items appeared to be above those in Georgetown, apparently in recognition of transport costs. Whilst workers are not held in debt bondage (i.e. are forced to work as a consequence of debt), they have little or no control over costs which they are requried to cover in order for them to fulfill their duties. This may be seen as employers passing on costs for which they should take responsibility and may havethe effect reducing take home pay to below the national minumum wage.

Forest managers are aware of implications of the ITTA in their region, and implement appropriate controls to ensure that its provisions are respected. Iwokrama liaises directly with ITTO and hosts ITTO research projects. Forest management in the Iwokrama forest is being carried out under the auspices of an ITTO research programme. Iwokrama has ongoing liaison with ITTO and continues to host ITTO reserch projects. Y Y

Forest managers ensure that provisions of the Convention on Biological Diversity applicable in their region are respected. Staff demonstrated awareness of CBD and its implications in Guyana. The objective of Iwokrama is to conserve its biodiversity and the organisation has links with other agencies working to conserve biodiversity in Guyana. Staff continued to demonstarte awareness of CBD and biodiversity conservation.

Y Y

Forest managers implement appropriate controls to ensure that other appropriate international agreements are respected. List of international agreements is included in the EIA. There has been training for staff (records inspected). EIA (Environmental managent plan) updated, ongoing training programme.

Y Y

Conflicts between laws, regulations and the FSC Principles and Criteria shall be evaluated for the purposes of certification, on a case by case basis, by the certifiers and the involved or affected parties. Conflicts between laws, regulations and the FSC Principles and Criteria are identified and evaluated by the forest managers, and brought to the attention of the inspection team. Managers have evaluatd FSC P&C and national laws and regulations. There is good awareness of both. No conflicts were noted. The Iwokrama and Y Amerindian Acts supercede many aspects of the Mining and Forest Acts. Fairview is an Amerindian community governed by the Amerindian Act. Though not detected, there may be potential for conflict. This should be reviewed at surveillance. Review did not result in identification of any conflicts between FSC P&C and national laws. Y

Conflicts between laws, regulations and the FSC Principles and Criteria are brought to the attention of the Government of Guyana and the Guyana National Initiative for Forest Certification in order to be resolved and, if not resolved, presented to the FSC. (GNIFC 1.4.1) Iwokrama has good levels of communication with national government agencies and with the GNIFC process. Iwokrama have proactively brought to the attention of authorities mining activity in adjacent areas that it considered inappropriate (subsequently controlled), has engaged at the level of Prime Minister with regard to development issues and interacted with the Ministries of Home Affairs, Amerindian Affairs and Transport. No conflicts noted

Forest management areas should be protected from illegal harvesting, settlement and other unauthorised activities. The forest management unit is protected from harvesting activities and other activities not controlled by forest managers or local people with use rights (e.g. settlement, illegal harvesting, poaching). There is access control along the major public access route. Indigenous peoples are allowed to hunt for subsistence use. The EIA raises the possibility that this may be abused for commercial purposes (see comments under principle 8). There are examples of inappropriate use being prevented adjacent to the forest area eg mining, and there was no evidence of illegal harvesting or settlement. Ongoing monitoring of boundaries and good awareness of potentially damaging activities - eg mining, examples seen of claims being identified, removed and liaison with appropriate authorities.

Systems to identify and prevent unauthorised activities are in place, documented and acceptable to all stakeholders as well as legally applicable (GNIFCd3 1.5.1). The main road traversing the forest is controlled by rangers and barriers. There is no control access at night. Vehicle movements are monitored and Y recorded; their contents may be inspected. Rangers patrol the forest and there are systems to record unauthorised activities. Liaison with local communities also provides information regarding unauthorised forest use. The systems are legally applicable and stakeholders are compliant with them. Documented monitoring system Y

1.5.3 Managers have taken measures to stop illegal or unauthorised uses of the forest. There are problems in relation to this aspect since managers do not have direct authority to enforce national law. There are also issues of staff safety in relation to this aspect. Illegal activities have been reported to the relevant authorities for action. Forest managers have been in contact with Guyana Police Force and Defence Force to discuss possibilities for empowering forest rangers to carry out enforcement activities. Police representatives are present at Ranger stations and act together with Iwokrama rangers as necessary. Police presence continues at ranger stations. Mining activity (claims) reported to appropriate authorities.

Borders of the FMU are identified in the field and in conflict cases there are written resolution procedures.(GNIFCd3 1.5.2) There are road barriers, and signs at main access points. Natural boundaries eg River Essequibo provide clear natural demarcation. No conflicts were noted Y the Fairview Community and its associated lands are located within the Iwokrama forest and have been recognised by Iwokrama. Both parties have worked together to define their boundaries. Iwokrama has proposed conflict resoultion procedures as they await the completion of the FMP. These procedures are within the co-management agreement between Fairview and IIC. However, it is uncertain whether there is a conflict resolution procedure for ISTI. Sign posts present at main entry points and are periodically monitored. Y

The FMO maintains a record of invasion by third parties and documents the outcomes of resolution procedures.(GNIFCd3 1.5.3) Monitoring records are kept. Information is sent to relevant authorities for follow-up and outcomes are documented. Ongoing monitoring, records inspected, mining activity reported.

Y Y

Forest managers shall demonstrate a long-term commitment to adhere to the FSC Principles and Criteria. Forest managers shall provide a documented statement declaring their long-term commitment to comply with FSC Principles and Criteria. There is a clear declaration of committment by the Iwokrama International Board and the TGI BoD. FSC requirements have been communicated to all staff, Y there is awareness training for staff and local communities. Staff and local people demonstrated good awareness of FSC certification and its requirements. Iwokrama staff have been actively involved in the FSC national initiative and have good knowledege of the detail of FSC forest management standards. TGI's staff have also benefitted from the training. Good general ongoing awareness of FSC - although a large number of new TGI staff have not yet received training/induction - see criterion 7.3. Y

Forest managers shall declare any areas under their control but not included within the scope of the certification evaluation. There are no areas outside of the scope of this evaluation controlled by Iwokrama. One area within the scope is under the tenure of Fairview Community. This is clearly documented and there is a clear co-management agreement between Iwokrama and the community (ITI). Scope confirmed - no change.

Y Y

FSC PRINCIPLE #2: TENURE AND USE RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES - Long-term tenure and use rights to the land and forest resources shall be clearly defined, documented and legally established. Clear evidence of long-term forest use rights to the land (e.g. land title, customary rights, or lease agreements) shall be demonstrated. Legal ownership or tenure can be proved and is not subject to dispute. Iwokrama Timber Inc. which is a wholly owned subsiduary of Iwokrama International Centre. The Iwokrama forest is delimited in the Iwokrama Act Y (1996). Consultation with GFC confirmed tenure. There is a discrepancy in the size of IIC's area of 360,000 versus 371,681 ha. See description under section 3b of report issues. Actually ITI = IIC + FV. See comments at 2.1.2. Issue referred to Lands and Surveys, and GFC. Confirmation received that precise area quoted by Iwokrama in management plans, 371,681ha (based upon Y GIS mapping) is correct. Iwokrama have letter of authorisation from Fairview in relation to area under Fairview tenure, plus co-management agreement. There is now a need to consistently reference the correct area in management documents.

3 5

A map is available clearly showing legal boundaries. The Iwokrama forest is delimited in the Iwokrama Act (1996). The Fairview Communtiy has gained title to 21,951ha of the forest under the Amerindian Y Act. They have ceded management of this area to ITI. There is no evidence of a substantive claim to title for land by indigenous peoples or other parties in any other parts of the FMU. However, note size discrepancy with GFC (2.1.1). The sizes vary in documents produced for/by IIC e.g. EIA, Co-management agreements and public documents. Issue referred to Lands and Surveys, and GFC. Confirmation received that precise area quoted by Iwokrama in management plans, 371,681ha (based upon Y GIS mapping) is correct. Iwokrama have letter of authorisation from Fairview in relation to area under Fairview tenure, plus co-management agreement.

Land is dedicated to long term forest management. This is required by the Iwokrama act. The forest is predominantly undisturbed primary rainforest. Land remains dedicated to long term forest management.

Y Y

Communities have clear, credible and officially recognised evidence, endorsed by the communities themselves, of collective ownership and control of the lands they customarily own or otherwise occupy and use. Fairview community has established title of the area immediately adjacent to their village 21,000ha, and there is an agreed co-management agreement for Y its management with Iwokama. The Fairview community has legal rights to 21,000ha under the Amerindian Act. The community has a co-management agreement for the use of the lands by ITI (IIC & FV) See Clacuse (iv) of the comanagement agreement between IIC and Fairview. Firview community continue to maintain tenure and excersize control over management through the co-management agreement and shareholding in ITI. Y

A written agreement on specific use areas between parties with overlapping use rights exists.(GNIFCd3 2.1. There is a signed, negotiated co-management agreement for the use of Fairview's forest resources. local communities have a shared ownership in ISTI timber operations through the co-management agreement between IIC and NRDDB, however, this agreement expired in 2006. NB: Clauses 6.5 and 8.2 were considered anomalies. Co-management agreement revised and signed by Fairview.

Local communities with legal or customary tenure or use rights shall maintain control, to the extent necessary to protect their rights or resources, over forest operations unless they delegate control with free and informed consent to other agencies. All legal or customary tenure or use rights to the forest resource of all local communities are clearly documented and mapped by the forest managers. It is clear that the Fairview communtiy is able to operate normally within the forest. This community has customary use rights to hunt, gather NTFPs and to farm within the forest boundary under the Amerindian Act. Communtiies to the South of the forest sometimes enter the forest to hunt and gather. It is not clear to what extent this is an established customary right although consultation suggests that Makushi people consider Iwokrama as falling within their ancestral lands. Under the Iwokrama Act this type of activity is permitted for subsistence use and the communities have legal tenure over part of the area this is clearly mapped through the Amerindian Act. There is a co-management agreement for the area. Co-management agreement revised and signed. Evidence that views of Fairview taken into account in scheduling of felling areas. Y

All legal or customary tenure or use rights to the forest resource of all local communities are recognised and respected in forest management planning and practice. Tenure and use rights are documented and incorporated into management planning. Consultation with local communities indicates that rights are Y respected in practice. The Fairview Management Plan is being developed for the resources of the entire Fairview area and should be in place from December 21, 2007 - refer to clauses 6.1 and 6.2 of the comanagement agreement between IIC and the community. Tenure and Use rights continue to be respected as confirmed through consultation with Fairview and NRDDB. Though note that Co-management Y management agreement remains incomplete (see 2.2.3 and 2.2.4).

Forest managers provide local communities control over forest operations to the extent necessary to protect their rights and resources. There is ongoing consultation between Iwokrama and communities. Fairview has ceded forest management on its land to Iwokrama (IIC) through ITI. There is a co-management agreement in place and a management plan being drafted for Fairview. Local communities are shareholders in ISTI. However during the evaluation, whilst some members of the local community appared to understand the agreement with Iwokrama and ISTI, others did not, there were also slightly different perceptions of how the share ownership arrangement worked and a poor understanding of how this would translate into financial benefit for the Fairview community and the others in NRDDB. There was also generally poor understanding of the economics of the timber operation and consequently a limited basis for the communities themselves to evaluate whether they were receiving appropriate payment for use of the forest resource.

There have been training workshops with local communities, and meetings have been held to present accounts and present details of the timber business, along with regular meetings with NRDDB and ISTI. However, the Co-management agreement remains incomplete. Whilst there has been legal representation for NRDDB in recent negotiations, there remains poor general understanding of the financial aspects of the timber operation, and stakeholder consultation suggested an increasing awareness amongst local people that this is an aspect that they wish to understand better. It is noted that in communication with the local community in relation to proportions applied to shareholdings, and benefits, there is frequently reference to the proportion of the total forest area proportions. i.e. Fairview percentage benefit is based on the % of the total forest area within their title. However, timber benefits derive only from the net operable area. There is a case for Fairview to argue that their timber benefit % should be based upon the operable area within their title as a proportion of the total operable area.

There is an agreement with the community to implement forest management and the community controls the forest management process. (GNIFCd3 2.2.1) There is a signed co-management agreement with Fairview Community and IIC forming ITI. There has been a joint zoning and management planning process with a management plan under preparation at the time of the assessement. Consultation with the community suggested that there is good cooperation between the Centre and the community. It should be noted that TGI implements the Operational plan of IIC through the ISTI arrangement. The community's ability to 'control' the forest management process is unclear. There is no document which establishes the Terms of Engagement between TGI and the communities, including (and especially) Fairview whose forest resources are being harvested. Refer to co-management agreement clauses 6.5 and 5.9. Fairview co-management agreement remains incomplete. N

Populations that are directly affected by forests operations have the opportunity to participate in the planning of specific tasks of forest management that could affect them. (GNIFCd3 4.4.2). The Fairview community and NRDDB have been involved in a participatory planning process. There is good ongoing consultation between Iwokrama and Y local communities. The community has identified management zones appropriate for their needs within the Fairview titled area. Community issues have also been incorporated into management of the wider forest area, for example identification of protection of wildlife and game migration corridors. However, the level of participation and influence of the community in the planning of specific tasks to be undertaken is unclear; especially where these activies may impact the livelihood of the community. Refer to clauses 5.9, 6.5 Good ongoing consultation remains, and communities note good co-operation with Iwokrama. See observations above in relation to Fairview management Y plan remaining incomplete.

Forest Management plans are agreed upon with the communities and are based on participatory planning, joint planning & implementation and local control. (GNIFCd3 2.2.3) Participatory planning process with Fairview Community and NRDDB. Co-management agreement exists with Fairview however, the one with NRDDB has expired. Co-management agreement with Fairview now revised and completed.

Y Y

In the case that the utilisation is delegated to third parties there are clear contracts in which the local and community regulations of forest activities are respected. (GNIFCd3 2.2.2) There is a co-management agreement and local community holds shares in ISTI. Implemenataion and local control - no documentation on terms of engagement between TGI and the Communities. Note Clause 5.9 and 6.5 No change

Y Y

Appropriate mechanisms shall be employed to resolve disputes over tenure claims and use rights. The circumstances and status of any outstanding disputes will be explicitly considered in the certification evaluation. Disputes of substantial magnitude involving a significant number of interests will normally disqualify an operation from being certified. Mechanisms exist for resolution of disputes between the forest managers and the local community over claims relating to tenure and/or use rights. No significant conflicts were raised. Iwokrama has regular meetings with local communities. Iwokrama has a disputes resolution procedure. However N there are no clear terms of engagement between TGI and Fairview; it is therefore unclear how would Fairview deal with disputes (if any) with TGI. Clauses 5.9 and 6.5. There are regular liason meetings between Iwokrama, TGI and local people through the auspices of ISTI. However dispure resolution mechanisms with N TGI are unclear.

Mechanisms for dispute resolution are respected in the event of any dispute between local communities and forest managers regarding tenure claims and use rights.

A Dispute resolution procedure exists. However, Iwokrama is commited to ongoing community consultation and proactively invloves local communities in the management planning process, thereby minimising the likelihood of disputes arising. See comments clause 13 of co-management agreement re Complaints, disputes and conflicts. See also comments under 2.3.1 above. No change

Management policy and operational procedures exist which require that, in case of a dispute or disagreement between the local community and the forest managers concerning land rights, forestry operations which prejudice the future enjoyment of such rights by the community are halted until the dispute is resolved. In addition to dispute resolution mechanism, Iwokrama has entered into joint management agreement with the local community. See clause 13. However N Clause 13 of the co-management agreement does not require that in the event that forest operations may prejudice the future enjoyment of community rights that such operations are halted.Note also comments re absence of Terms of Engagement under 2.3.1 above. No change. N

Forest managers provide access to forest resources for local communities without legal or customary land rights, where such access does not prejudice the achievement of management objectives. Community consultation suggests that local communites have free access as required to gather subsistence resources. However in relation to fulfillment of Y small orders stakeholder comment was received that where orders were <1000 BM these could be fulfilled by village and those over 1000 BM would go to ISTI. However there was no evidence that such a mechanism was being implemented Community consultation suggests that there has been regular provision of material and that this has been used to satisfy local orders for timber. This is Y considered sufficient to close the recommendation, however a further recomendation is made to assist local communites in developing the ability to process and effectively use material provided.

There is no evidence of any unresolved dispute of substantial magnitude involving a significant number of interests regarding tenure and use rights No such dispute is evident. Y

In the case of potential conflicts there are written procedures to prevent them. The procedures recognise the negotiation strategies of local communities and the participation of a negotiator mutually accepted by parties and within the legal framework. The mechanisms are included in the management plan. (GNIFC d3 2.3.2) No conflicts were noted. Ongoing consultation and dialogue is evident and community aspirations built into management planning procsses. There is a co- N management agreement that details the relationship between Fairview and Iwokrama. The Fairview management plan has been developed jointly with the community and at the time of the assessment was under preparation.See comments under 2.3.1 in relation to potential for conflict with TGI and the procedures for dealing with these. Note also that Clauses 13.1 requires appointment of complaints officers and there was no evidence that this had been implemented at the time of the audit. Complaints officers not yet appointed.

The FMO has a documented public relation policy and is involved in an active dialogue process with the surrounding communities affected by forest management. (GNIFC d3 2.3.3) The FMO (IIC) has a documented PR policy which is relevant to the IIC operations prior to its incorporation as ISTI. IIC has an ongoing consultative process with the NRDDB and the Fairview Community No change.

Y Y

FSC PRINCIPLE #3: INDIGENOUS PEOPLES' RIGHTS - The legal and customary rights of indigenous peoples to own, use and manage their lands, territories, and resources shall be recognised and respected. It is not clear to what extent all members of communites living in and around the forest can claim the additional protection of principle 3 since many do not appear to fulfil the requirements of the UN definiton. This must be clarified in discussion with the GNIFC. Indigenous peoples shall control forest management on their lands and territories unless they delegate control with free and informed consent to other agencies. The identity, location and population of all indigenous and traditional peoples including migratory groups living in the vicinity of the management area are documented by the forest managers.

4.5

Forest managers have knowledge of all their neighbours both in terms of population and location. Detailed demographic data is held and settlements Y mapped. Discussions with GNIFC indicate that these communities should all be recognised as indigenous peoples despite the fact that many of them are of mixed origins and some are relatively recent immigrants to the area. Iwokrama recognises the communities as indigenous people as defined by FSC and as provided for under the Amerindian Act. No change Y

All claims to lands, territories or customary rights within the management area are documented and/or clearly mapped. Some Makushi groups claim that the entire Iwokrama forest falls within their traditional lands. This appears to be a general feeling amongst the Makushi consulted.Initially there was concern among local communities that their lands were being gifted without their full and informed consent. However, consultation with community groups and representative organisations suggest that Iwokrama (IIC) has worked hard to develop community relations and proactively to assist community development. The IIC posits that they are securing the long term viability of the forest from which there should be long term community benefit. From interviews, local communities generally appear to have no problems with the presence of IIC as forest managers in the region. Use rights and benefits from the forest have been negotiated with Iwokrama and are included in the collaborative management agreement. Local communities currently appear happy with the presence of Iwokrama (IIC) as forest managers in the region however, several persons interviewed had no knowledge of the TGI arrangement. Note comments at 2.1.2. Consultation with communities in Fairview, Surama, Bina Hill demonstrated ongoing support for Iwokrama and confirmation that recognition is given to indigenous peoples rights.

The communities concerned have identified themselves as indigenous or tribal Local communities identify themselves as Amerindian. No change

Y Y

Forest management operations do not take place in areas identified in norm 3.1.2 above, without clear evidence of the free and informed consent of the indigenous or traditional peoples claiming such land, territory or customary rights. see 3.1.2. In addition there are co-management agreements with local community and local community hold shares in the joint venture for timber harvesting. However note level of understanding regarding appropriate compensation described under 2.2 above. No major change (gradual development of awarenes within local communities regarding timber operation).

Y Y

There is a written agreement with the indigenous community to implement long-term forest management, and the community controls the process related Y to management.(GNIFCd3 3.1.1) There is a written (signed) co-management agreement between IIC and Fairview through the formation of ITI. Consultation with local people suggested that there were good working relationships with IIC.Forest management of Fairview's resources have been ceeded to ITI and onward to ISTI; however; the level of community involvement is not clearly defined. Of note however, is the Fairview management Plan which is yet to be completed. Co management agreements in place with NRDDB and Fairview. Y

Forest management plans are agreed upon with communities and are based on participatory planning practices, co-management and local control.(GNIFCd3 3.1.2) There has been participatory planning process, and IIC has co-management agreements with Fairview (2000) and NRDDB (2005, although now expired) . The Y Management plan for the Fairview area has yet to be completed. Co-management agreements in place. Fairview management plan remains incomplete - see criteria 2.3, 7.2 Y

There is clear evidence that written agreements are adhered to (GNIFCd3 3.1.3) Consultation with local people suggested that Iwokrama implement agreements appropriately. Implmentation in the field was consistent with plans.

Some clauses in the agreements seem vague, inpractical and immesurable in terms of providing clear evidence (see 4.4, 5.9, 6.5, 8.2, Article 3.13. Article 13.2 recommends the identification of a Complaints Officer which at the time of the audit, was evident in the case of the community. Further the lack of a terms of engagement between Fairview and TGI or coherent coverage of such in the co-management agreement was noted. No change Y

Forest management shall not threaten or diminish, either directly or indirectly, the resources or tenure rights of indigenous peoples.

Before a forestry operation under outside management commences near an indigenous peoples lands, any potential shared boundaries of the community's lands shall be physically demarcated under the supervision of the community and documented in mutually agreed written agreements.(GNIFC d3 3.2.2). This is certainly the case for the Fairview community and its titled land (see pg 1, iv of Co-management agreement) which is the only area where active harvesting operations are planned in the near future. Forest managers state that the Southern Boundary with the Surama community has been inspected and agreed on the ground. The discrepancy of the size of IIC's land is however noted. Discrepancy in relation to land area corrected. Joint meetings held with local community representatives, timber harvesting operation has commenced outside of Fairview titled land at the request of Fairview. Agreement minuted in ISTI meeting minutes.

3.2.2 The forestry management operation shall document any potential threats, direct or indirect, to the resources or rights of such indigenous peoples (e.g. disturbance to water resources and wildlife). An EIA has been produced as part if the Environmental management plan. Managers have documented and monitor the impact of mining along the Y Essequibo river. Watershed issues outside the forest itself have been considered. There have been collaborative conservation projects outside the forest area with local communities. However, the auditors noted that there was not compliance with the conditions of the environmental permit issued by the Guyana EPA nor was there evidence of the establishment of baseline conditions prior to the commencement of the project. See Criterion 6.1. Regular meetings with Fairview, NRDDB and ISTI meetings are all minuted with issues raised and planned responses noted. Y

The forestry management operation shall have documented policies and procedures to prevent any encroachment, or direct or indirect threat to the resources or rights of such indigenous peoples. The FMO has does not have an explicit policy and procedure to deal with encroachment and /or threats to resources and rights per se; however, there are Y mechanisms within the co-management agreement and collaborative management agreement, and the Fairview management plan is under preparation. In addition the Fairview Community have recourse through the Iwokrama Act and the Amerindian Act respectively. The FMO is also guided by the framework of the Iwokrama Act. Co-management agreement with NRDDB revised. Y

Traditional access for subsistence uses and traditional activities is granted

These rights are secured under the Amerindian Act and permitted within the Iwokrama Act and co-management agreement. See Vol.3, pg 49, , section Y 8.1.1 of the Environmental & Forestry Management Plan. Traditional uses include collecting non timber forest products and hunting of game species, these activities are (to be ) documented by Iwokrama and explicitly allowed. No change Y

Sites of special cultural, ecological, economic or religious significance to indigenous peoples shall be clearly identified in co-operation with such peoples, and recognised and protected by forest managers. Policies and procedures for the identification, recording and mapping of sites of archaeological, religious, historical, economic or other cultural sensitivity prior to the commencement of forest management activities in the forest management area as a whole are documented and have been implemented. Archaeological sites have been identified and mapped. There is a procedure to add additional sites as they are encountered in the course of normal operations. Ceiba pentandra, a sacred tree will not be harvested as per IIC/Fairview Agreement. There has been a participatory planning process with the Fairview Community in which the community have identified aspects of importance to the village and managemet zones established accordingly. N.B.Even though TGI has no Terms of Engagement with Fairview or NRDDB, their staff have been exposed to training on how to deal with such findings A potential site of cultural significance (possible historic settlement) was noted during inventory, this was noted as being of potential interest to local people, and a joint site visit organised to evalute it. Results to be recorded.

These sites are indicated in a resource map, and if protective actions need to be taken, they are also demarcated in the field.(GNIFCd3 5.7.1). GIS maps identify sites. To date no additional sites have been identified which require protective action and field demarcation. (Note Clause 5.4 re IIC's liability) New potential site noted (see above) and subject to due process at time of audit January 2009.

Y Y

The policies and procedures include the involvement of Indigenous peoples in the identification of such areas. There is clear evidence of participatory planning approaches adopted, and ongoing consultation and communication with communities. Records of meetings were examined. Article (IV) in the Fairview Agreement and Viii in the NRDDB agreement outline the procedures to be followed in the identification of such areas. Evidence of the involvement of the indigenous community in the identification of areas was provided by IIC.

Locak community representatives involved in evaluation of site identified above.

3.3.3 Policies and procedures for the identification and protection of such sites during management operations (e.g. harvesting, road building, etc) are documented and implemented. This needs to be determined at main audit. No evidence of a documented policy or procedure being implemented by TGI (through its third party Y arrangement with ITI) was evident. However, there was awareness of action to be taken should such sites be discovered - certification training to IIC and TGI staff and Communities. The Iwokrama na Amerindian Acts also contain provisions for such measures. Procedure implemented upon identification of potential site noted above. Y

Policies and procedures for the appropriate protection or management of identified sites are documented and implemented. There should be evidence of protective measures taken in worked areas where such sites have been identified. (GNIFCd3 3.3.2). Evidence needed at main audit. See comments at 3.3.3 above. There was no evidence that such sites have been found in worked areas. Site with potential interest identified above subject to evaluation with local community at time of audit Jan 2009.

Y Y

Indigenous peoples shall be compensated for the application of their traditional knowledge regarding the use of forest species or management systems in forest operations. This compensation shall be formally agreed upon with their free and informed consent before forest operations commence. Managers have recorded known applications of traditional knowledge (e.g. regarding the use of forest species or management systems) in the forest operations. The IIC has stated its intention and adherance to such principles. The Centre also commissioned the study compiled in Makusipe Komanto Isera Sustaining Makushi Way of Life; which is copyrighted to NRDDB, 1996. No change

Y Y

Local communities have been informed of such applications, including the potential commercial benefits of such applications to the forest management enterprise.

Local communities have been informed of the applications and are signatory to co-management agreements with IIC through the Fairview and NRDDB arrangements. IIC has developed a benefit-sharing model which has been shown to the communities. However, the comments recorded at 2.2.3 are of significant note here also. Some additional work carried out by Iwokrama to explain timber operation and business. However see outstanding concerns under criterion 2.2

Local communities are fairly compensated for any such applications, in accordance with prior agreements. Are tree spotters fairly compensated for their traditional knowledge. There is a need for a procedure to document this knowledge. There is evidence that such applications exist but it is not known to what extent these have been documented. At least one case was reported to the auditors of indigenous knowledge but it is not clear if there is a system to record these and if the system is known to community members and to forest managers. See also comments at 2.2.3 Contracts and rates of remuneration for tree spotters reviewed. Tree spotters interviewed appeared content with terms and conditions of service, both within Iwokrama nd TGI.

FSC PRINCIPLE #4: COMMUNITY RELATIONS AND WORKER'S RIGHTS Forest management operations shall maintain or enhance the long-term social and economic well-being of forest workers and local communities.

The communities within, or adjacent to, the forest management area should be given opportunities for employment, training, and other services. Local and forest-dependent people have equal access to employment and training opportunites. Iwokrama is one of the larger employers in the area. Most present unskilled and semi skilled workers are from the local communities. Consultation with Y local people confirmed that there are employment and training opportunities with Iwokrama. Staff employed at the harvesting site also included members of the local community. Management staff are largely from outside. Training is provided for low level posts. There is an HR policy. NRDDB is involved in the recruitment and interview process for vacancies amd training at IIC. Both co-management agreements include clauses dealing with training and employment for community peoples. There has been a significant increase in the number of TGI workers at the sawmill site. At the time of the audit many workers had been brought into the N area from outside in apparent need to recruit numbers quickly. However, this may not be the most appropriate approach in the long term in terms of social impact. Alternative employment terms and conditions designed with greater sensitivity to local cultural needs and expectations could potentially result in greater uptake of employment by local workers. (eg more regular turnaround times with more options for off site time).

Appropriate to the size, type and location of the forest management enterprise, members of local communities are provided with access to basic services (e.g. health and education). Iwokrama has assisted the local community schools and educational facilities eg Fairview & Bina Hill, as well as provided training courses directly on Y biodiversity, wildlife clubs, etc. IIC provides medical support to Fairview. There is a programme for Aids Awareness. Iwokrama generally contributes to community development projects. Iwokrama is in discussion with Bina Hill Institute in relation to assisting with the curriculum. There has been ongoing work to raise awareness of HIV. Y Medical support is provided. The rapid expansion of the sawmill site brings new challenges to the local community, it is not clear that the social and health impacts have been fully evaluated (eg sexually transmited diseases, alchohol use). See further discussion under Criterion 4.4.

Workers are not discriminated in hiring, advancement, dismissal, remuneration and employment related social security Iwokrama HR policy provides for non discriminatory practices; TGI has a similar policy. Training is given to assist suitability for employment and there is Y a structured on-the-job training programme. All staff have employment contracts specifying terms and conditions including payment of social security. Note well, the terms of termination rests solely with the employer (IIC or TGI). NRDDB recruits and interviews local applicants for training and employment at IIC. It is not clear whether local community representatives have input to recruitment within TGI. Recent hiring practice by TGI appears to have include N workers starting without them having a contract or clear understanding of terms and conditions of service. The structure of employment terms and conditions appear to dscriminate against local cultural expectations.

Wages or income of self-employed or contractors are at least as high as those in comparable occupations in the same region and in no case lower than the established minimum wage. Contracts seen for Joint venture partner employees (TGI) and their subcontractors complied with minimum wage requirements. However these workers did not have an explicit contractual right to voluntarily terminate their contracts. Contracts have been revised to include reciprocal rights to voluntarily terminate. Rates of pay for recently hired workers at the sawmill site appeared to be either undefined and/or below the national minimum wage

N Y N

There is clear evidence of good neighbourly relations (GNIFCd3 4.1.3) Consultation with communities demonstrated clear and ongoing good relations with Iwokrama. Jobs vacancies are made known to local communities and Y announced on the local community radio. Some produce has been made available to local commumity by joint venture partner TGI - however comment was received that more could be done in this respect with regard to the material provided and the mannner in which it was delivered. The communities expressed very scant knowledge of TGI and its operations. Stakeholder consultation demonstarted good relations between Iwokrama and local communities. Local community representatives noted some Y improvement of their understanding of the TGI operation and joint meetings have been held under the auspices of ISTI. Local community members had gained employment, although preference was expressed for an alternative approcah to terms and conditions giving greater recognition to cultural circumstances. See discussion under 4.1.3 and CAR 2009.06.

Agreements between FMO and subcontractors should adhere to national labour legislation and sector labour agreements. (GNIFC 4.2.7) Joint venture partner contracts and employement were inspected. These complied with national legislation including minimum wage requirements. One anomaly noted was that employees/contractors are not given the explicit contractual right to voluntarily terminate their employment. See comments under 4.1.1 and 4.1.4

Forest management should meet or exceed all applicable laws and/or regulations covering health and safety of employees and their families. Managers are familiar with relevant health and safety guidelines and regulations. There is a H&S policy, and joint venture partners TGI also have a H&S policy. The GFC code of practice contains guidance on health and safety requirements for harvesting operations. Both Iwokrama staff and managers of TGI demonstrated familiarity with the detail of these requirements. The organisation lacks a dedicated health and safety officer and a functioning Health Committee in compliance with the terms of the OSH Act. Good general awareness of H&S requirements by managers within Iwokrama and TGI. Evidence of recent investment in Personal Protective Equipment (PPE).

Managers have assessed the risk to workers of particular tasks and equipment, and take measures to reduce or eliminate such risks. Risk assessments have not been carried out. The IIIC has compiled a Safety & Health Handbook for its operations. Risk assessments have been carried out in relation to specific tasks. However these wre not available on site (sawmill) at the time of the audit and it was not clear that workers were familiar with Risk Assessments relative to their tasks which calls into question the effectiveness of these assessments. Site hazards were also noted, eg hung up trees adjacent to access routes and there was no evidence of an analysis of site based risks (eventhough there was a report of a falling tree having struck one worker).

N N

4.2.3 Safety training is carried out, relevant to the tasks of workers and the equipment used. RIL training has a safety component. Some effort was made towards good practice on site with helmets and high visibility jackets given to operators, managers and visitors. However deficiencies were noted with regard to provision for chainsaw operators suggesting that this area would benefit from being reviewed. There appears to be a need to further develop H&S training. RIL training remains relevant to harvesting operations and there was evidence that this had been carried out. Some workers at the sawmill site recalled training, and there was evidence in the form of training records. Relative to other operations in Guyana safety management was considered good (eg by stakeholders) and all workers seen were wearing some personal protective equipment eg hard hats, high visibility jackets, car safety belts were routinely worn. However, many recent workers had received no training.

4.2.4 Workers are provided with safety equipment, relevant to the tasks of workers and the equipment used. Practice on site was generally good with helmets and high visibility jackets given to operators, managers and visitors. However deficiencies were noted N with regard to provision for chainsaw operators operators who did not use full personal protective equipment (chainsaw protective trousers, ear defenders, chainsaw protective boots absent) and the chain brake on the chainsaw inspected did not function. Practice on site was generally good with helmets and high visibility jackets given to operators, managers and visitors. Some improvement was seen in N relation to chainsaw operators with ear defenders and eye protection in evidence. Protective safety trousers had been ordered but were not in use at the time of the audit. No chainsaw safety boots were seen although chainsaw operators expressed interest in using these (especially those involved in chainsaw milling). A number of new chainsaws were seen however a chainsaw with a defective chain brake was again noted. Sawmill workers apparently had no ear protection, and those involved in manual handling of sawn lumber did not have re-inforced foot protection (e.g. toe caps).

Managers take measures to ensure that workers use any safety equipment that is provided. Generally this is done, however chainsaw operators did not comply with codes of practice and neither Iwokrama nor TGI managers acted to ensure that corrective action was taken. Improved enforcement is required to comply with FSC requirements. Whilst clear efforts have been made to develop safety standard there has been no apparent enforcement of stricter compliance eg stopping work when chainsaw operators do not have full safety gear.

N N

Managers implement an accident reporting system that includes all work related accidents and deaths of employees, their causes, corrective action taken to prevent similar accidents in future. There is a system for recording accidents. However there is no formal procedure for reporting accidents to managers or the board. There is no formal procedure for preventing similar accidents in the future. No change.

N N

4.2.7 There is assured compensation benefits in case of accidents. There does not appear to be any compensation procedure. No contributory HI scheme for short term contracted staff. Is the company legally compliant. N There may be a problem with NIS payments for subcontracted staff. Management of the FMU will be reponsible for ensuring compliance with this by their subcontractors. In at least one case the widow failed to recieve compensation due to bureaucratic delays, the company should develop a procedure to assist with claiming compensation.No knowledge of TGI's arrangements One worker employed by Iwokrama suffered a serious accident losing an arm. Iwokrama acted swiftly to assist with medical attention and associated N costs. However, eventhough the worker was a driver to whom loss of an arm would have a significant professional impact, there was no evidence of compensation for this serious loss. A number of stakeholders expressed discontent with this case.

All relevant legislation relating to health & safety of employees and their families when in situ (Occupational Health and Safety Regulations, EPA hazardous materials regulations and provisions concerning Health and Safety, operational and camp hygiene in the Code of Practice for Timber Harvesting in felling, extraction, trucking, road construction, camp and workshop activities, in-forest saw milling and other forest management activities) is complied with. (GNIFC 4.2.2, 4.2.3) Harvesting operations were not fully compliant with safety management requirements of Code of Practice for Timber Harvesting. With the exception of non compliances relating to chainsaw operators above no other non compliances were noted.

Plans are in place to develop facilities at the camp however, at the time of the audit conditions at the sawmill camp were poor in relation to hygeine and sanitation. Facilities provided were poor and not being used.

Where workers stay in camps, conditions for accomodation and nutrition comply at least with ILO Code of Practice on Safety and Health in Forestry. Specifically, adequate shelter, clean water, sanitation and protection from occpational disease (e.g. malaria) in camps are provided. (GNIFC 4.2.5). Conditions in camp appeared adequate with the noteable exception of wooden debris heaped around the entire perimeter of the living and working areas N of the ISTI camp which presented a fire hazard. The poorly constructed 'old' toilet facility which was evidently still in use and the fireside/coalpot observed on the wooden floor in one of the quarters were also noted. Plans are in place to develop facilities at the camp however, at the time of the audit conditions at the sawmill camp were poor in relation to hygeine and N sanitation. Facilities provided were poor and not being used.

The rights of workers to organise and voluntarily negotiate with their employers shall be guaranteed as outlined in Conventions 87 and 98 of the International Labour Organisation (ILO). 4.3.1 Employment conditions comply with International Labour Organisation convention 87 (see Appendix 2) - This Convention relates to the rights of workers to: freedom of association and protection of the right to organise. Based on interview with managers and separately with employees and contractors there does not appear to be any union membership. Managers indicate Y that in principle union membership is possible through their stated policy. There has been training provided to employees to explain ILO requirements and employees rights. Employees interviewed did not express any wish or need to join a union. The Ministry of Labour provided training to ISTI staff on August 28, 2007 - IIC's records of training examined. There was evidence of training and awareness in relation to ILO requirements. However recently hired workers at the sawmill site had no contracts, were N unaware of their terms and conditions of employment prior to commencement, and had received no briefing in relation to rights to associate and bargain collectively. Local community members expressed an interest in different terms and conditions of employment to those offered but there did not appear to be an effective mechanism for negotiating this.

4.3.2 Employment conditions comply with International Labour Organisation convention 98 (see Appendix 2) - This Convention relates to the rights of workers to: organise and bargain collectively. Based on interview with managers and separately with employees and contractors there does not appear to be any union membership. Managers indicate that in principle workers were free to organise and join a union. There has been training provided to employees to explain ILO requirements and employees rights. Employees interviewed did not express any wish or need to join a union. It should be noted that in the absence of union representation, the Laws of Guyana permit workers to seek recourse through the office of the Chief Labour Officer, Ministry of Labour.

There was evidence of training and awareness in relation to ILO requirements. However recently hired workers at the sawmill site had no contracts, were N unaware of their terms and conditions of employment prior to commencement, and had received no briefing in relation to rights to associate and bargain collectively. Local community members expressed an interest in different terms and conditions of employment to those offered but there did not appear to be an effective mechanism for negotiating this.

There is clear evidence that employees are directly and effectively informed of their rights by relevant third parties. There is evidence of FMO support for this process.(GNIFC 4.3.2). Iwokrama have implemented a training programme to inform employees of their employment rights. The training/awareness programme was conducted by representatives of the National Insurance Scheme, and the Ministry of labour for the benefit of ISTI Staff (training records examined). Recently hired workers at the sawmill site had no contracts, were unaware of their terms and conditions of employment prior to commencement, and had received no briefing in relation to employment rights.

Management planning and operations shall incorporate the results of evaluations of social impact. Consultations shall be maintained with people and groups directly affected by management operations.

4.4.1 There are systems in place that provide an evaluation of the social impact (resource access and social well being), appropriate to the size and intensity of their operations that: - identifies affected groups - includes consultation with affected groups - identifies the main impacts of the operation on those groups - specifies measures to ameliorate identified negative impacts - provides for regular contact with affected groups to monitor effectiveness of measures. There is a need for further information in the ESIA about subsistence food needs of the communities and in particular if there are seasonal deficiencies that need to be addressed. The EPA's Terms of Reference for the conduct of the ESIA and the conditions of the Environmental Permit provide the framework for such evaluation; however, there was evidence on incomplete/insufficient compliance with the Environmental Permit. Major development of the new mill site is new since the main assessment. The scale of the operation and its potential impacts were not clear in the Environmental Management Plan and there has been no evaluation of the social impacts of this operation. Given the size of the planned operation, which plans to bring in over 100 workers, lack of a social impact assessment is a major omission. It is arguably the single biggest impact in recent times. Concerns have already been raised in relation to impacts of introducing a cash economy to traditional communities, increased risk of sexually transmitted diseases, alchohol use, impacts upon the nearby Fairview community. Conversely, the development plans to include facilities (canteen, medical, education, sports, social use) which have the potential to bring positive benefits. However potential benefits to the local community have not been evaluated. Iwokrama has built substantial social capital in its community work to date, however, failure to effectively evaluate the social impact of such a major social change to the area has the potential to put this at risk and is a major oversight.

4.4.2 Results of social impact evaluation are incorporated into management decisions. There is evidence for the inclusion of the findings in the management plan, and a process is underway to develop a community mnagement plan for the Y Fairview area. There is limited evidence of inclusion of the affected groups in the determination (and awareness) in the manner and scale of the operations being conducted through ISTI with TGI. See further observations under 2.2 and 2.3. and CARs 2007.5 and 2007.6. There has been an academic study analysing Iwokrama's contribution to Local Communities (Sutton 2008) which give a generally positive analysis, and N includes consideration of the timber operation. However, there has not been an effective evaluation of the impact of the new mill site - as such Iwokrama are not able to demonstrate how the results of such an evaluation have been incorporated into management decisions.

Forest managers implement a clearly defined system for ongoing consultation with local people and interest groups (both men and women).

There is regular ongoing consultation with local people. Regular meetings are held, these are described in co-management agreements (E.g. Clause 6.7 in the IIC/Fairview agreemement) and details recorded. There has been a participatory management planning process. No change

Y Y

Appropriate mechanisms shall be employed for resolving grievances and for providing fair compensation in the case of loss or damage affecting the legal or customary rights, property, resources, or livelihoods of local peoples. Measures shall be taken to avoid such loss or damage. Mechanisms for resolving grievances are documented and implemented. Procedures for resolving complaints, disputes and conflicts are documented in the Co-Management agreements with Fairview community and NRDDB. However, the establishment of the Complaints Committee was incomplete at the time of the audit as Fairview (and NRDDB) had not identified their representatives for the Committee. Further, the NRDDB/IIC co-management agreement had expired. On the other hand, the IIC had a Human Resources Policy and Procedures Manual. Conflict resolution mechanisms have been discussed with local community organisations and resolved.

4.5.2 Mechanisms exist and are implemented for providing fair compensation to local people where their legal or customary rights, property, resources or livelihoods have been damaged. The only documents detailing the relationship between IIC and local communities are the co-management agreements, one of which had already expired. N These documents do not explicitly address issues of compensation. Neither is it clear how potential damage caused by the activity of TGI would be dealt with. Conflict resolution mechanisms have been discussed with local community organisations and resolved.

Inadvertent damage to indigenous and traditional resources on, or near, indigenous and traditional lands shall be compensated as agreed with the indigenous and traditional communities themselves. Each case of compensation is validated by a written agreement. There is no documented Terms of Engagement between the local communities and TGI which was conducting harvesting operations on Fairview's land at N the time of the audit. Aside from the co-management agreements (IIC & NRDDB/Fairview) mentioned, the governing instruments are the Laws of Guyana, the Iwokrama and the Amerindian Acts which present overarching provisions for such situations. Conflict resolution mechanisms have been discussed with local community organisations and resolved.

Measures are taken to prevent damage or loss that may affect the rights, goods, or livelihoods of local communities and these are documented in the management plan (GNIFCd3 4.5.1). The JVC (ISTI) did not have/present a Management Plan at the time of the audit. IIC's Environmental & Forest Management Plan and co-management N agreements present such measures, however, there is a reliance of the Fairview FMP which is yet to be completed. The absence of the Terms of engagement with TGI was again noted. Fairview management plan has yet to be completed (see criterion 2.3/7.2 CAR 2007.6). Liaison with TGI noted via regular ISTI meetings, noted also that Y these meetings have resulted in changes to management.

FSC PRINCIPLE # 5: BENEFITS FROM THE FOREST Forest management operations shall encourage the efficient use of the forest's multiple products and services to ensure economic viability and a wide range of environmental and social benefits. Forest management should strive toward economic viability, while taking into account the full environmental, social, and operational costs of production, and ensuring the investments necessary to maintain the ecological productivity of the forest. There is a work plan and budget for the forest management enterprise showing all expected planning & operational costs and revenues for at least the current financial year. There is a business plan for Iwokrama (IIC) as a whole. Actual activity differs from the content of the business plan eg projections in relation to the timber N business are behind schedule. There is not a clear financial plan for ITI nor for ISTI. Joint venture partners have a business plan for timber operations this does not anticipate a profit in the first instance due to the necessary initial capital investment. Each plan is considered confidential and not shared with the joint parties. Iwokrama staff have monitored the estimated value by species of timber harvested under the ISTI arrangement and calculate the value due to the local community. The managers have excellent information about the timber stock. Using conservative potential value (taken from forest managers own market studies) of the timber at dockside in Guyana the value of sawn timber (10000m3 = 50% recovery from round) FOB at Georgetown is at least 3 million dollars per year. At present the company will recieve about 6% of this which in turn limits the amount available for the community. Iwokrama aim to monitor the financial inputs and outputs however there may be doubt as to whether the current situation can be considered economically viable, or whether the division of value is equitable between the community and other stakeholders.Iwokrama's earned income (as opposed to donor income) has steadily increased over the past few years (trebled between 2001 and 2006).

3.5

ITI now has a budget and there are audited accounts for 2007, (2008 in preparation). This includes the cost of key operational staff, and income is based upon predicted harvesting by species. The price paid per cubic metre by TGI is sbove national norms and this is considered to reflect additional social and environmental costs. There remains an unclear distinction between monitoring in relation to management and long term research (although a Science Research Committe has been establishe to look at this) and division of costs between IIC and ITI remain unclear i.e. it is not clear the extent to which IIC is in effect subsidising the cost of forest management operations eg costs associated with community liaison and development. Nevertheless ITI accounts show a profit, a proportion of which was disbursed to the local community, and IIC has demonstrated sufficient resources to cover the costs of its operations and projects. New sources of income are being explored in relation to environmental services (including carbon). TGI have invested substantially in infrastructure, capital equipment, and staff, it remains to be seen whether this will be a sustainable business venture. Although revenue has been dispersed to the local community, the basis upon which this has been calculated remains poorly understood, and consultation demonstrated a growing interest in gaining better information regarding the economics and relative benefits deriving from the timber operation. N

The income predicted in the annual budget is consistent with the expected rate of harvest of forest products (see 5.6). Income predictions are precisely based on timber species evaluated by inventory. Y Income predictions have been updated based upon anticipated marketing of merchantable species (the range of marketable species has increased since the Y main assessment).

The income predicted in the annual budget is consistent with product values comparable to regional or national norms, The income predicted is based on agreed stampage values. These are in the region 15-20% of the potential value of the timber FOB at Georgetown. However figures eg royalties are based on national norms and appear broadly consistent with national expectations for stumpage. No change

The annual budget incorporates stumpage, royalties or rents as required. Stumpages and roylaty rates are clearly specified with joint venture partner. No change, accounts and invoices inspected.

Y Y

The annual budget specifies any costs associated with implementation of the social and environmental commitments identified in Principles 4 and 6. The predicted income from timber operations will not be sufficient to cover these costs. Iwokrama International centre receives income from a variety of sources including donor funds which help to cover research and development costs. An overall approach is being developed that aims to achieve income from a range of sources including a) funds from research findings and intellectual property b) non timber forest products and forest services c) timber operations. It is likely that there will be an ongoing reliance upon donor funds for the foreseeable future. Overall there is considerable commitment to and expenditure upon implementation of the social and environmental aspects of FSC FM standards, however these are unlikely to be met purely from timber and non timber income streams controlled by ITI. ITI accounts and budgets seperated from IIC. ITI budgets available for 2009, 2010. However, these do not appear to cover all social and environmental costs. N

Forest management and marketing operations should encourage the optimal use and local processing of the forest's diversity of products. Forest Operations seek efficient & optimal utilisation of forest resources. (GNIFC 5.2.1) Reduced Impact Logging (RIL) techniques are used thereby minimising waste and loss of forest resources. Trees are felled based on known demand by species. No logs are exported from site. All timber produce is milled on site. Milling of small dimension timber helps to use available timber effeciently. RIL logging carried out over the previous year was inspected. Standards of felling were generally high and there wa sminimal damage to residual stands. There was little evidence of waste and resources were being used efficiently.

2 Y

Forest managers make a proportion of their production available to local enterprises, such as small-scale industries and processing operations. (see 5.4 below for related norms) Sawmilling takes place on site this adds value locally and provides local employment. Some material has been made available to the local community by N joint venture partner, although comment was been received regarding the suitability/value of this produce and the manner of its delivery. No locally controlled enterprises are currently being supported. There has been provision of lumber to local people by TGI. There have been some examples of the local community supplying product eg sawn lumber Y and an exampe of boat building. There has been some support for business development training within local communities and there has been a submission for funding from ITTO to support a local community forestry project.

The Forest Management Unit Operator has updated market information that is guided by the marketing strategies of the company and is linked to forest resource assessment information.(GNIFC 5.2.3) Good forest resource data is available based on inventory. Iwokrama commissioned market survey in 2002/03 and have made income projections based on N a business plan. TGI, the joint venture partner has evaluated the timber resource in relation to market opportunities and have a market strategy. However Iwokrama and TGI do not appear to have shared this information effectively and the Iwokrama business plan does not currently reflect achievement to date. Predicted income is based upon anticipated harvesting by species. Accounts show value of timber sold. Y

Forest management should minimise waste associated with harvesting and on-site processing operations and avoid damage to other forest resources. The FMO has a mechanism in place to evaluate tree quality before felling (marking, directional felling). (GNIFCd3 5.3.3) Tree quality is evaluated at inventory and immediately prior to felling. RIL techniques used include a tree quality assessment, marking and directional Y felling. These techniques were well implemented and minimal damage was seen to residual stands. Areas logged in the previous year were visited and quality of work appeared generally high, directional felling observed, with minimal damage to residual Y stands.

There is no excessive damage to residual stands of trees or other products (honey, balata, manicole, nibbi etc) during and after harvesting. (GNIFCd3 5.3.1). RIL techniques as implemented result in minimal damage to residual forest stands and the range of products present. No excessive damage noted - areas logged in last year visited.

Y Y

Timber and other products (honey, balata, manicole, nibbi etc) are extracted and processed promptly after harvesting so that degradation & loss are minimised. (GNIFCd3 5.3.1). Timber is extracted based on known demand and milled immediately. No degradation or loss was noted on site. There was no evidence of other products being harvested.

Milling on site continues, no evidence of logs remaining in log yards for extended periods.

Planning, organisation and application of appropriate technology are applied (e.g. New on-site processing machinery is selected taking into account the need to minimise timber waste). (GNIFCd3 5.1.2) 2 New 4 wheel drive agricultural tractors were purchased by joint venture partner for harvesting operations. These appear to have been purchased based N on availability rather than suitability for purpose. More appropriate machinery might be better suited to the operations, as whilst the machines purchased are adequate to implement the work, they may be limited in terms of power and versatility. No road/access construction/maintenance machinery were seen on site. Overall planning and organisation was good and the RIL approach taken minimises waste of the forest resource. There has been a major investment in foresty machinery with skidders, loaders and road construction machinery on site. All appeared to be in good condition with on site workshop being used for regular servicing, repair and maintenance. Y

It is documented that contract and payment systems with field workers (tree identification, fellers, bunchers, and machinery operators) include mechanisms that consider not only production criteria, but also product quality and reduction of damage to the remaining forest. (GNIFCd3 5.3.2). RIL techniques are employed. There are documented systems for this and all employees and contractors interviewed displayed good awareness and systems were well implemented in the field. It is not clear that there is provision in contracts or wage payment systems. Harvesting operators involved in RIL felling and extraction demonstrated good knowledge of requirements and ability to carefully implement work. Damage to the remaining forest was minimal. Y Y

If feasible, salvage harvesting should be done in current or recent annual harvest areas based on results of objective assessment of forest stand (e.g. silvicultural survey). (GNIFCd3 5.3.4). Harvesting has only recently commenced and has not taken place in the past except on a small scale by the local community. Salvage harvesting is not carried out on a large scale. There is very limited felling of damaged trees as RIL techniques limit this. Occasional damaged trees or trees felled to create access routes are enumerated and taken into account in felling volumes within the current harvest area.

Salvage harvesting is not routinely practised under RIL techniques. Some fallen trees were noted in situ where road/access construction had been Y completed. It was not clear that the potential use of these trees had been considered. There were plans to re-enter some areas harvested during the previous year in order to gain accesss to species not previously considered merchantable - see further discussion under criterion 5.6.

Forest management should strive to strengthen and diversify the local economy, avoiding dependence on a single forest product. Based on discussion with the other relevant forest users , Managers collect information on the range of the forest's potential products and services, including 'lesser known' timber species, Non Timber Forest Products (NTFPs) and opportunities for forest recreation during the pre-harvest inventory . (GNIFCd3 5.4.2). IIC Managers have evaluated NTFPs and documented these. There is good collaboration with local communities in identifying NTFPs. Facilities have been Y developed for forest recreation eg Canopy Walkway and forest trails. There is ongoing research into potential non timber products and environmental services. Commercialisation of butterfly rearing is currently being Y researched. There is ongoing work in relation to marketing environmental services eg carbon/climate services.

Managers are aware of the role of these products and services in the local economy (whether as trade goods or for subsistence). Non Timber Forest Products and services have been well researched by IIC and are recognised as important actual or potential sources of income Y generation. Income is derived from forest visitors which in turn benefits the local community. Currently income from these sources exceeds timber income. Further work being carried out to explore options fo rmarketing environmental services. Y

Managers have assessed the possibility of utilisation of forest services, lesser known species and NTFPs on their own account or by local enterprises. Managers (IIC) have asssessed NTFPs and forest services and partnered tourism with local enterprises .IIC has in addition supported the development of non timber related conservation projects that generate income outside of the forest itself, eg, fisheries projects and develpment of butterfly rearing. There is ongoing work, eg currently looking at practicalities of commercialising butterfly production within community. Y

Managers encourage the utilisation of forest services, lesser known species and NTFPs by local enterprises where this does not jeopardise other management objectives. Yes. The Iwokrama International Centre has conducted extensive research in this respect with practical application in partnership with local communities. Continuing work. See observations 5.4.1 to 5.4.3.

Y Y

Forest management operations shall recognise, maintain, and, where appropriate, enhance the value of forest services and resources such as watersheds and fisheries. Forest managers have information on the down stream uses of water from the forest watershed. (see Criterion 6.5b for norms with respect to maintenance of water resources and fisheries) There has been an evaluation of wetlands outside the forest area including the Rupununi and Essequibo Rivers and their associated wetlands and the role of the forests in these watersheds is well recognised. See 5.5.3 No change.

Y Y

Forest managers have information on the fisheries above, in and below the forest watershed. (see Criterion 6.5b for norms with respect to maintenance of water resources and fisheries) The evaluation of water resources includes consideration of fish populations. Y No change Y

Forest management must show evidence of recognition, maintenance, and when appropriate improvement of the forest services and resources in particular related to watersheds. (GNIFCd3 5.5.1) There is good recognition of watershed resources with examples of collaborative projects with local communities to manage and conserve fish populations, as well as other aquatic life eg giant otter, and caiman. Good awreness of watershed issues and potential impact of operations on water quality.

Y Y

Areas of special services and resources are mapped . (GNIFCd3 5.5.2). Rivers and Wetlands are clearly mapped in collaboration with local communities.Their resource use both within and outside the forest is recorded (GIS maps). Wetlands mapped. Ongoing research into other environmental services.

Y Y

The FMO consults with other relevant agencies on special (forest and environmental) service areas and facilitate their management. (GNIFCd3 5.5.3). There is evidence of consulatation with EPA and GFC, the Environmental Impact Assessment has been reviewed by EPA. There is also evidence of consultation with regulatory authorities (e.g. re: mining). However, there was evidence of non-compliance with some conditions of the Environmental Permit and the lack of formal, official approval of the Forest Management Plan at the time of the audit. These are dealt with under 1.1 and 6.1. Ongoing consultation although note limited capacity within EPA. Y

The rate of harvest of forest products shall not exceed levels which can be permanently sustained. The silvicultural system on which management is based is clearly stated. Selective logging based on a species specific inventory data and allowable cut. Application of the plan appeared appropriate at field inspection.. No change

3 Y Y

The expected level of harvesting on an annual basis, and in the long term (over more than one rotation) is clearly stated. Harvesting is limited to the Sustainable Use Area (SUA) which comprises 49.6% of the total forest area (50.4% of the area is Wilderness Preserve where no harvesting is planned). The net operable area accounts for 59.1% of the SUA resulting in only 29% of the total forest area identified for potential exploitation. A harvesting cycle of 60 years is clearly stated in the Environmental and Forest Management Plan. Minimum diameter felling criteria are given (above national norms - GFC Code of Practice). The expected level of harvesting is 20000m3. The GFC national norm for allowable cut is 20m3/ha, Iwokrama ( ITI) plan 18.7m3/ha harvested (This is equivalent to 0.5 m3/ha/yr over the FMU as a whole) ie overall a low rate.

See description under issues Sheet 6 Surveillance 1.

The expected level of harvesting is clearly justified in terms of the permanently sustainable yield of the forest products on which the management plan is based. Harvest levels are based on inventory data, all trees to be harvested have been enumerated. See description under 5.6.2 above. See description under issues Sheet 6 Surveillance 1.

All assumptions regarding regeneration, growth, abundance, quality and size distribution of the main commercial species are explicit, and in line with the best available data for the locality from relevant research and/or inventories, and in the absence of that on conservative assumptions acknowledged by the competent authorities (GNIFCd3 5.6.2). Harvesting predicions are based on detailed inventory and set within limits that are accepted within Guyana. Harvesting plans are based on species Y specific data. RIL harvesting is intended to minimise impact upon the forest. At present there is relatively little data about the growth and silvicultural response of the forest post harvesting. An issue of relevance in this respect is the long term response of key commercial species to harvesting eg Greenheart, Purpleheart. Research on this aspect elsewhere in Guyana is not conclusive but there is the possibility or likelihood that abundance of some species will reduce by the end of the cutting cycle. Data relating to forest response will be obtained through a post harvesting inventory and monitoring programme to determine if further silvicultural interventions are necessary. Note lack of final approval of FMP and Annual Plan by GFC - the leading authority see criterion 1.1. See description under issues Sheet 6 Surveillance 1. There are plans to re-enter areas already worked. Iwokrama management proposals refer to single entry harvesting with long return periods that underpin the assumptions regarding long term ipacts of harvesting upon yield and forest dynamics. The re-entry is to target species not previously harvested, however, unless this is managed carefully there could be additional (colatteral) impacts. A one-off rentry as part of the lerning process near the beginning of the harvesting operation may be acceptable, but should not be allowed to become the norm.

One greenheart stump was noted below the 45cm minimum harvest limit. The explanation given for this was that the tree had been damaged during harvesting, that this tree was felled, and in its place another retained (that had been intended for felling) in order to maintain the 10m proximity rule. Nevertheless Iwokrama need to guard carefully against removal of sub mature trees in order ensure succession of the species.

The expected level of harvesting in the long term does not exceed local or regional expectations of sustainable yield, taking into account any special silvicultural treatments that have been applied. Harvest rate is below national guidelines within areas to be worked and apparently lower than other operations in the region. Taken over the FMU as a whole rates are well within the productive capacity of the forest. Growth rates in the climatic regime could be up to 10m3/ha/yr in intensively managed stands. See description under issues Sheet 6 Surveillance 1.

PRINCIPLE #6: ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT 3.0667 Forest management shall conserve biological diversity and its associated values, water resources, soils, and unique and fragile ecosystems and landscapes, and, by so doing, maintain the ecological functions and the integrity of the forest. Assessment of environmental impacts shall be completed appropriate to the scale, intensity of forest management and the uniqueness of the affected 3 resources and adequately integrated into management systems. Assessments shall include landscape level considerations as well as the impacts of onsite processing facilities. Environmental impacts shall be assessed prior to commencement of site-disturbing operations A system is specified that ensures an assessment of environmental impact is made before commencement of any site-disturbing operations. The system: - is appropriate to the scale and intensity of the forest management - takes account of landscape level considerations - is appropriate to the uniqueness of the affected resources At the landscape level there is a comprehensive EIA for the harvesting operations, consisting of 3 volumes: I - Environmental Impact Statement(94pp); II Overview , Baseline & Assessment (94pp), III - Environmental & Forestry Management plan (66pp). These contain sufficient information to enable decisions to be made concerning the impact oprations. This has been submitted to EPA and approved. However, the assessment of water quality to establish baseline conditions was considered inadequate and there was not full compliance with implementation of permit conditions at the time of the audit. There is no evidence of a full evaluation of the environmental impacts of the development of the mill site (the original environmental management plan envisaged a much smaller operation with two mobile mills processing a maximum of 6000cum pa the new site is substantially larger Y

6.1.2 There is a system to ensure that results of the assessment of impacts are taken account of in subsequent operations.

The EIA - Environmental permit process of the government promotes this - there are conditions attached to the permit in relation to monitoring Y compliance.Inventory and mapping data inform operations prior to their implementation however Iwokrama does not currently implement a systematic site level pre-operational assessment that identifies key values or constraints at the site level. Such a system could have particular relevance in the context of a joint venture partner implementing the most site disturbing operations. The prevailing system is that the results of the EIA are used to inform the EMP and FMP and adapted in the Annual Plan taking into consideration monitoring results, etc. These are evaluated by the GFC and EPA to ascertain compliance with the conditions of the relevant permits. There is no evidence of a full evaluation of the environmental impacts of the development of the mill site (the original environmental management plan envisaged a much smaller operation with two mobile mills processing a maximum of 6000cum pa the new site is substantially larger

Safeguards shall exist which protect rare, threatened and endangered species and their habitats (e.g., nesting and feeding areas). The likely presence of rare, threatened and endangered species and their habitats (e.g. nesting and feeding areas) has been assessed on the basis of the best available information. There is good information about the presence of such species. Endangered, Threatened and Rare species are systematically reviewed with reference to Y CITIES. No change Y

Areas containing or likely to contain such species or are identified and marked on maps. The entire area is recognised as being likely to contain such species, including some endemic species. See principle 9 HCVF. No change

Y Y

There is a list of rare, threatened & valuable species in the management plan. Procedures are documented and implemented to safeguard such species and their habitats. In doing so the provisions of CoP for timber harvesting must be observed. (GNIFCd3 6.2.1). Just over half the forest area is designated as Wilderness Preserve in order to safeguard species and their habitats. The EIA considers the effects of forest management on key species. Species and species groups are listed in the EIA. Harvesting CoP observed (though note H&S non compliance). There is monitoring of the presence of these species on an ongoing basis. See monitoring principle 8. No change

Conservation zones and protection areas shall be established, appropriate to the scale and intensity of forest management and the uniqueness of the affected resources. Areas of special regional importance for biodiversity are identified on maps, and protected from harvesting and other site disturbance. Just over half of the FMU is strict wilderness preserve. The net operable area accounts for about 29% of the entire forest concession. No change

Y Y

At least 10% of the forest area is designated as a conservation zone, identified on maps, and managed with biodiversity as a major objective. The wilderness area (50%) is strictly protected with biodiversity conservation as the major objective. There may be benefit to long term monitoring in this Y area to determine if management may be neeeded at some time in the future i.e in response to changes caused by climate change and logging activity in the SUA. All mapped on GIS. No change Y

At least half of this area (i.e. 5% of the total forest area) is designated as a protected area, identified on maps, and is fully protected from commercial harvesting. See 6.2.5. above. 50% protected from commercial harvesting. No change

Y Y

Selection of conservation zones and protected areas is justified in terms of their potential to maximise their contribution to the maintenance or enhancement of biodiversity The key forest,and other habitat types present in Iwokrama have been described and mapped. Maps indicate that representative samples of ecosystems are Y represented in the Wilderness Preserve. No change Y

The protected area includes examples of all existing ecosystems within the forest area. The key forest,and other habitat types present in Iwokrama have been described and mapped. Maps indicate that representative samples of ecosystems are Y represented in the Wilderness Preserve. No change Y

The movement of key plant and animal species between reserved and harvested areas is encouraged by retaining corridors of uncut forest based on streamsides with links up slopes and across ridges to connecting any large patches of forest which will not be harvested. Just over half the area will not be harvested. Harvested area will be disturbed although the area affected in any 5 year period will be relatively small and the use of RIL techniques will result in reducing impact in terms of habitat connectivity. In addition specific areas e.g.buffers have been identified where the maintenance of corridors for animal movement have been identified. No change

Inappropriate hunting, fishing, trapping and collecting shall be controlled. There are documented systems for controlling hunting, fishing, trapping and collecting of animals or plants for commercial purposes, for sports, as pets or to feed the employees of the forest and industrial operations (GNIFCd3 6.2.1). There is monitoring of the road corridor traffic and barriers where loads may be inspected. Monitoring is carried out in co-operation with the EPA Wildlife Y division, records are kept. Under the Amerindian Act and Iwokrama Act local Amerindian communities are permitted to hunt for subsistence purposes. There is no evidence to suggest that this presents a threat to animal or plant populations, however, there is no monitoring of this aspect of local community activity and therefore no means by which to evaluate actual or potential impacts. The development of the mill site camp has the potential to have an impact upon potential fauna and flora in the locality. Controls and monitoring in N relation to this are not clear.

Systems are in place to prevent hunting or trapping of protected species. See above. Patrols by rangers are carried out. Signs identifying protected areas and 'no hunting' were observed during the audit. The development of the mill site camp has the potential to have an impact upon potential fauna and flora in the locality. Controls and monitoring in relation to this are not clear.

Ecological functions and values shall be maintained intact, enhanced, or restored, including: a) Forest regeneration and succession. b) Genetic, species, and ecosystem diversity. c) Natural cycles that affect the productivity of the forest ecosystem. The silvicultural system adopted is appropriate to the ecology of the forest. Single tree removal mimics small scale gap creation by tree fall. There is a proximity rule stipulated by the GFC Code of Practice to prevent large scale gap formation (trees less than 10m from a felled tree shoul dnot be removed) and this was being implemented in practice. Implementation of RIL techniques appeared good throughout areas inspected where harvesting had taken place in th elast year.

Y Y

Systems that use small clearfell areas, selective felling and create varied age class have been considered. Single trees are felled. Small clear-felled were created for camps, log markets, etc, in compliance with the CoP No change

Y Y

Forestry operations must, if appropriate to the silvicultural system, aim for a mixture of compartments differing in size, shape, species, and date of planting and felling, in harmony with the landscape. The impact of low level harvesting and adherance to RIL techniques should not have landscape impact. No change

Y Y

The scale of felling (e.g. coupe size) is commensurate with the natural dynamics of the forest type and the area under consideration (unless clearly justified silvicultural reasons are given). Small gap creation allows for the recruitment of shade tolerant high value trees. The system does not create the larger gaps that occasionally occur due to windthrow but windthrow itself should take care of this. No change

Y Y

Management of the forest area as a whole is designed to ensure that the full complement of naturally occurring tree species regenerates successfully in the forest area over the duration of the rotation. Ample regeneration was evident in the forest, including regeneration of the tree species being felled. The full complement of species should continue to regenerate, however monitoring will need to determine if this regeneration is appropriate to the future management objectives of the forest and evaluate any changes in overall species composition eg there may be a reduction in the incidence of some tree species. No change. See further discussion under Criterion 5.6

Selective felling and thinning regimes are designed to maintain genotypic diversity. Single tree removal (restricted by proximity limits) would facilitate other specimens of the same species are left in each ha should ensure this.No thinning is Y carried out. No change Y

Biodiversity is routinely maintained by the retention of marginal habitats e.g. streamside vegetation, vegetation on rocky outcrops, swamps and heaths. Marginal habitats such as creeks, wet areas, rocky outcrops and their associated buffers are mapped on GIS and retained in practice. No change

Y Y

Standing and fallen dead wood habitats are retained. No dead wood is removed. No change

Y Y

Trees are marked for retention-seed, habitat & keystone trees. (GNIFCd3 6.3.3).

Such trees were identified during the pre-harvest inventory. Only trees identified on the inventory for potential felling, and identified for felling under RIL Y procedures are marked for felling. All other trees are retained. No change Y

Representative samples of existing ecosystems within the landscape shall be protected in their natural state and recorded on maps, appropriate to the scale and intensity of operations and the uniqueness of the affected resources. There is not less than 5% reserve areas of all representative forest types within the concession. (GNIFCd3 6.4.1) (See also 6.2.8) Y 50% of the whole forest area is identified as Wilderness Preserve and contains representation of all key forest types. No change Y

Written guidelines shall be prepared and implemented to: control erosion; minimise damage during road construction, and all other mechanical disturbances; There is written guidance or policies and procedures for new road building, road maintenance and other mechanical disturbance to mitigate the environmental impacts of these operations. These guidelines comply with the CoP.(GNIFCd3 6.4.1). The GFC Code of Practice for Timber Harvesting provides guidelines for road construction, crossing watercourses, log markets. This is supported by the Y RIL training courses and manuals. Iwokrama have adopted these guidelines. Implementation is currently being carried out by joint venture partner TGI. It is not clear how Iwokrama monitors implementation of the Code of Practice requirements by TGI nor how corrective action is ensured if required. Reference is made to the CoP and there has been training in road construction. Site visit with key staff involved in road construction demonstrated good N general awareness of these guidelines. Nevertheless specific protocols/guidance in relation to road construction have not been prepared and examples of poor quality roading were noted (flooding, downslope erosion exceeding CoP guidelines). To some extent this may be a function of gaining experience of the site and the way in which constructed roads respond in relation to varying climatic conditions. Nevertheless, road conditions suggest greater emphasis should be placed upon planning and construction of roads and harvesting access routes.

Guidance, Policies and procedures include the following norms for the design and building of new roads: - New roads are planned in advance on topographical maps showing existing streams - Roads are fitted to the topography so that a minimum of alterations to the natural features will occur - Wherever possible roads are located on natural benches, ridges and flatter slopes - Road construction in steep, narrow valleys, slipprone or other unstable areas, natural drainage channels and streamsides is minimised - Roads are not be aligned through environmentally sensitive areas - Embankments and cuttings are stabilised to resist erosion - Drains and culverts are designed to minimise erosion These requirements are incorporated into The GFC Code of Practice for Timber Harvesting which has been adopted by Iwokrama. No change. However see observation under 6.5.1 above

Y Y

Machinery operators receive adequate training and are aware of the requirements with respect to protection of water resources This is the case for all operators who have received RIL training. Training records inspected. Staff on site generally displayed good awareness of Code of Practice guidelines. RIL training carried out. Training in road construction has been carried out. Further training planned.

Y Y

Written guidelines shall be prepared and implemented to: protect water resources. Policies and procedures for the design and building of new roads include the following norms with respect to protection of water resources, which are implemented: - Stream crossings are planned before operations begin and shown on relevant maps - The number of stream crossings is minimised - Stream crossings are at right angles to the stream - Valley bottom roads and tracks are kept as far back from the stream as possible - Culverts are designed so they do not obstruct the migration of fish, create fast water velocities or stream beds unsuitable for fish - Drains do not drain into natural watercourses. Where this is unavoidable, regularly emptied silt traps are installed. These requirements are incorporated into The GFC Code of Practice for Timber Harvesting which has been adopted by Iwokrama. Extraction route N construction and log market seen appeared to comply with GFC code of practice guidelines, although it was not clear whether culvert construction using log clusters was in compliance with 4.4 Watercourse Crossings (recommended use of culvert or pipes), and it was not clear whether Iwokrama staff had monitored or evaluated this. A training course is being established for delivery at Iwokrama (IIC) by the Forestry Training Centre.Given that operations are at an early stage it would be timely to establish robust systems to ensure consistently high implementation of guidelines and it is not currently clear what Iwokrama (IIC) procedures are in place to ensure this .

Training carried out. However systems apparently not sufficiently robust as examples of poor quality roading were seen.

New roads are not constructed in streambeds. Existing roads in streambeds are closed and replacements are constructed. No roading or extraction routes were seen in streambeds. One crossing was under construction. Completed crossing acceptable. No roads in stream beds, although some areas were flooded.

Y Y

Buffer zones in which harvesting does not take place are established around all permanent watercourses. A 20m buffer is used and trees may not be felled into this zone. Buffer zones respected in practice.

Y Y

6.6.7 There is no evidence of siltation or other damage to water sources. No evidence of damage to watercourses was seen, (note that operations are at an early stage). Some downslope erosion noted. See 2007.17

Y N

6.5c Written guidelines shall be prepared and implemented to: minimise forest damage during harvesting, There are written policies and procedures to minimise forest damage during pre-harvesting, harvesting & post-harvesting. These procedures comply with the CoP. (GNIFCd3 6.5.1). GFC Code of Practice adopted supported by RIL handbook and training. IIC have adopted the GFC's Code of Practice for Timber Harvesting and their staff have received RIL training for forest operations. It should be noted however that harvesting operations were at an early stage in the project's implementation. RIL harvesting well implemented.

Policies and procedures include the following norms, which are implemented: - Protected areas are physically demarcated, at least temporarily, before any forest operations start on near by land - Harvesting machinery must not enter streams except at designated and designed stream crossings - Lop and top shall not be pushed into streams - Extraction is stopped when soils are saturated - The use of brash mats is specified, where appropriate These requirements were met at the harvesting sites seen. Requirments met,although not clear when harvesting is stopped in response to wet conditions. See 2007.17.

Y Y

Harvesting techniques are designed to minimise erosion and run off. Observation of harvesting practices showed RIL techniques were adopted to achieve minimal site disturbance. No erosion or runoff were noted at site inspection. One example of erosion/run off noted. See 2007.17.

Y N

Harvesting and extraction methods are designed to minimise damage to residual trees and regeneration. RIL Manual, training and implementation. Examples of felled areas and felling in progress confirmed minimal residual damage. Howver, haversting operations had been very limited up to the time of the audit. RIL harvesting sites inspected demonstrated minimal residual damage ti forest stands.

Y Y

New harvesting and extraction machinery is selected taking into account the need to minimise damage to soils, residual trees and regeneration. See observation under criterion 5.3 with regard to selection of machinery. Residual damage to trees and regeneration seen on site was minimal. Harvesting N activities thus far minimal to make a significant determination of the impact on damage to residual stands and regeneration. Suitability of equipment would also be determined by the FMO's proposed scale of operations. There has been a major investment in foresty machinery with skidders, loaders and road construction machinery on site. All appeared to be in good Y condition with on site workshop being used for regular servicing, repair and maintenance.

Workers receive appropriate training in harvesting and extraction methods. Workers have received training in RIL techniques from the Forestry Training Centre Inc.; there was generally good awareness of these requirements and implementation of harvesting seen appeared appropriate. Training in RIL, road construction. However many new workers have not received induction and training relative to their tasks.

Y N

Management systems shall promote the development and adoption of environmentally friendly non-chemical methods of pest management and strive to avoid the use of chemical pesticides. Documented pest, disease and weed control strategies are available. EIA vol II section 3.4.4 states that no chemical pesticides, herbicides, or preservatives will be used in the timber harvesting operation. It states that should there be a need to use these in the future a detailed chemical use management plan will be presented to the GFC, the Pesticides and Chemicals Control Board and the EPA prior to implementing their use. Limited amounts of chemical are used at the IIC field station and the base camp to control mosquito and other pests eg rodents. There is a basic policy, procedure for use of chemicals and a system for recording alternatives considered. However this does not really constitute a strategy.

Chemical use reviewed. Limited use which is recorded and documented. However no clear strategy. Given that potential impacts with new mill site would be at a greater scale if chemical use implemented recommendation raised to Condition.

Procedures are in place to record all use of synthetic chemicals by the forest management enterprise Records of chemical use include: a) Name of the product b) Location of the site treated; c) Area of the site treated; d) Method of application; e) Date chemical use started; f) Date chemical use finished; g) Total quantity of the chemical used; There is procedure to record poduct name, location and area, application date, quantity, plus alternatives considered, conditions at time of application and Y notes on disposal of any container. The recording system is recently established and not yet fully implemented.

It is not clear to what extent chemical use in the forest by joint venture partner and/or local people is controlled or recorded. Such use should be subject to GFC code of practice for Timber Harvesting sections 7.2, 7.3, 7.4 this requires that the company would need to obtain the relevant chemical technical data sheet from the GFC. See also Conditions of environmental permit. See observation under 6.6.1 above.

Chemicals are only used when absolutely necessary to achieve defined management aims. Reason for use is recorded together with alternatives considered are recorded. Quantities used are small. No change

Y Y

Synthetic chemicals are only used where there is no known non-chemical alternative not entailing excessive cost. Synthetic chemicals were not observed to be currently used in forest management. Use at the field centre is limited. No change

Y Y

A procedure is in place to record the most appropriate non-chemical alternative that was considered and rejected prior to use of the synthetic chemical, together with the justification for use of the chemical rather than the non-chemical alternative. A basic system for recording reason for use and alternatives considered has been developed though not yet fully implemented. No change

N N

Chemicals are used only in minimum effective quantities, with strict observation of controls and regulations and protocols governing the use of chemical products banned by Guyanese or international law are observed.(GNIFCd3 6.6.1). Synthetic chemicals are not currently used in forest management. Use at the field centre is limited. There is control in place to limit quantities issued according to identified need. No change

Y Y

World Health Organisation Type 1A and 1B and chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides; pesticides that are persistent, toxic or whose derivatives remain biologically active and accumulate in the food chain beyond their intended use; as well as any pesticides banned by international agreement, shall be prohibited. The use or storage of these chemicals on certified units is prohibited. No evidence of use or storage. See list of chemicals used under 6.6.9 below. Y No change Y

The use or storage of seed and seedling dressings based on mercurial, organophosphate and organochlorine compounds (including Gamma HCH, Lindane and BHC), or other longlasting chemicals which can accumulate in food chains or the ecosystem is prohibited. No seed dressings used. No evidence of listed compounds in use. No change

Y Y

Chemicals classified as Highly Hazardous by FSC shall not be used unless derogation has been approved by FSC. See Annex 6 to this standard. Chemicals noted include: Chlorophacinone (rodent control); alpha-cyana-3-phenoxy benzyl cis trans 3 (2-2 dichlorovinyl) dimethy cyclopropane carboxilate; monocrotophos; sevin dust. None of these are noted (Sept 07) as being on the Highly Hazardous chemicals list as defined by FSC. No change Y

If chemicals are used, proper equipment and training shall be provided to minimise health and environmental risks. Training and relevant equipment are provided to all operators for the safe handling, storage & disposal of chemical products & containers . Policy states that only qualified staff and contractors may use chemicals. However training for insecticide application not seen. No change

2 N N

Fuel tanks and stores are located so that spillages from damage, defects or refuelling shall not enter watercourses. Stores inspected at field centre, ranger station, and fuel/oil storage at harvest camp/site. Present stores do not appear adequate, for example at the time of N the assessment the bunded areas were inadequate, though arrangements in place for improvement . Many containers were observed outside the bunded area under unsafe conditions. Harvesting site management of fuels and oils did not appear to comply with Code of Practice for Timber Harvesting sections 7.2, 7.3, 7.4. (eg no bunding, use of handpumps for fuel, collection and disposal of containers). Store at field station remains inadequate. Planned major fuel storage facility at/near field station will need high quality facility and management. Mill site N fuel storage currently temporary - long term storage under construction, but requires completion. As larger quantities of fuel will generally be in use better storage and management needs to be implemented.

All equipment for the transport, storage and application of chemicals shall be maintained in a safe and leakproof condition. Oils and fuels are not always transported in clearly marked and appropriate containers. Note also requirements for handling, transport and disposal in Code of Practice for Timber Harvesting sections 7.2, 7.3, 7.4. Do not appear to be fully complied with. See observation under 6.6.11 above

N N

Application of chemicals within 10m of watercourses and 30m around reservoirs and lakes is prohibited. This does not happen. Requirements specified in EIA document. However, some evidence of improper storage of chemical/fuel containers near the vegetable garden at the Field Station No change

Y Y

Application if heavy rain is expected, during wet weather, on frozen snowcovered ground or ground that has baked dry during a drought is prohibited. n/a n/a

n/a n/a

Soaking of seedlings treated with chemicals in drains or watercourses prior to planting is prohibited. n/a n/a

n/a n/a

There is no evidence of pollution by chemicals (GNIFCd3 6.6.3) No evidence of pollution was noted in the field. Evidence of improper storage of containers which could ultimately lead to pollution. Note 6.6.11 and 6.6.12 Y above. As at MA Y

There are no records of chemical-pollutant related health symptoms. (GNIFCd3 6.6.4). There were no reports of chemical pollutant related health symptoms. No change

Y Y

Chemicals, containers, liquid and solid non-organic wastes including fuel and oil shall be disposed of in an environmentally appropriate manner at off-site locations. Off-site locations have been identified for the disposal of chemicals, containers, liquid and solid non-organic waste in an environmentally appropriate manner consistent with EPA & CoP guidelines. (GNIFCd3 6.7.1). GFC Code of Practice for Timber Harvesting requires that toxic materials (inc oils, fuels) be removed to designated disposal sites or to the supplier. It is not N clear that Iwokrama require joint venture partner TGI to comply with this. TGI currently constructing fuel storage. Nevertheless see observations under 6.6.11

There is a system in place for taking waste to the appropriate locations for disposal. Systems have been established for the separation and collection of waste in the field centre and harvesting camp. There was not a clear system for fuel and N oil storage, transport and container disposal/return.

No change

Disposal does not take place in watercourses or lakes or by burying consistent with EPA & CoP guidelines. (GNIFCd3 6.7.1). . There is no disposal of waste in water courses or lakes. There is limited burial of non toxic waste at outstations in compliance with GFC Code of Practice for Y Timber Harvest Operations. No change Y

There is no evidence of waste left in the forest. Waste in the forest and around forest camp was genarlly well managed. Exceptions are given above (e.g.4.2.9). In addition there is a build up of sawmill residue and offcuts at the mill site. This will be a growing problem in the absence of a clear strategy to deal with it and could develop as a fire hazard in due course this is dealt with under criterion 7.1f. Fire hazard appeared to have been controlled at surveillance visit

Use of biological control agents shall be documented, minimised, monitored and strictly controlled in accordance with national laws and internationally accepted scientific protocols. Use of genetically modified organisms shall be prohibited. There is a procedure in place for the documentation, supervision and monitoring of all use of biological control agents. None used None used

Y Y

Biological control agents are used only when absolutely necessary to achieve defined management aims as part of integrated pest management system (use of naturally occurring organisms is permitted). None used Y None used Y

There is no use of genetically modified organisms by the forest management enterprise. No GM modified organisms are used. All species are native to the area.. No GM modified organisms are used. All species are native to the area..

Y Y

The use of exotic species shall be carefully controlled and actively monitored to avoid adverse ecological impacts. All use of exotic species is documented and justified. None used - a clear aim of management is to protect and enhance native biodiversity values. No change

5 Y Y

Exotic species used are monitored to evaluate potential adverse ecological impacts. None used - a clear aim of management is to protect and enhance native biodiversity values. No change

Y Y

In the event that adverse ecological impacts are identified control actions are implemented. None used - a clear aim of management is to protect and enhance native biodiversity values. No change

Y Y

Forest conversion to plantations or non-forest land uses shall not occur, except in circumstances where conversion: a) entails a very limited portion of the forest management unit; and b) does not occur on high conservation value forest areas; and c) will enable clear, substantial, additional, secure, long term conservation benefits across the forest management unit.

Forest conversion to plantations or non-forest land uses shall not occur, except in circumstances where conversion: a)entails a very limited portion of the forest management unit; and b)does not occur on high conservation value forest areas; and c)will enable clear, substantial, additional, secure, long-term conservation benefits across the forest management unit. No conversion is carried out by forest managers. A very limited amount of clearance has taken place around the village of Fairview, however this is on a very limited scale, and brings benefits to the forest as a whole by supporting the development of the local Amerindian community. No conversion

FSC PRINCIPLE #7: MANAGEMENT PLAN A management plan -- appropriate to the scale and intensity of the operations -- shall be written, implemented, and kept up to date. The long term objectives of management, and the means of achieving them, shall be clearly stated. The management plan and supporting documents shall provide: a) Management objectives. b) Description of the forest resources to be managed, environmental limitations, land use and ownership status, socio-economic conditions, and a profile of adjacent lands. c) Description of silvicultural and/or other management system, based on the ecology of the forest in question and information gathered through resource inventories. d) Rationale for rate of annual harvest and species selection. e) Provisions for monitoring of forest growth and dynamics. f) Environmental safeguards based on environmental assessments. g) Plans for the identification and protection of rare, threatened and endangered species. h) Maps describing the forest resource base including protected areas, planned management activities and land ownership. i) Description and justification of harvesting techniques and equipment to be used. j) Plans should incorporate recommendations from the SIA The management plan and supporting documents shall provide: Management objectives. There is a clear statement of the objectives of forest management. There are two key documents containing management planning information "Iwokrama Forest Forest Management Plan" and the "Environmental and Forest Management Plan". The former covers the full range of activities if the centre and in some respects is akin to a general business or organisational plan, though it also contains forest management detail. The status of this plan is not clear, it is not complete, and expires Dec 07. The latter focuses more on management aspects and specifies actions over the first five years of operations. A number of additional documents have also been prepared including a statement on the Silvicultural System and the sustainability of timber production, and site/project specific plans eg Canopy Walkway.

3.5

There is a mission statement. There is no clarity about the long term objective of management in terms of forest structure and composition or product yield. The Iwokrama Forest Forest Management Plan gives a Vision for the Iwokrama Forest - that it is a place where the Iwokrama Centre works with local people to conserve the natural and cultural heritage of the forest, to sustainably use the forest and to provide models for sustainable forest management and use of tropical forests that can be used by other forest owners and managers. Objectives of management are given as:

The Environmental Impact Statement vol I gives Iwokrama's vision as "To promote the conservation and the sustainable and equitable use of tropical rain forests in a manner that will lead to lasting ecological, economic, and social benefits to the people of Guyana and to the world in general, by undertaking research, training, and the development and dissemination of technologies". Volume III gives General Objectives as "The JVC will be a global model for timber harvesting, demonstrating innovative governance models (including communities and private sector), environmentall suatainability, social sensitivity and economic viability. The Iwokrama Forest Forest Management Plan descibes structures and process in some detail, and goes on to descibe a series of attributes, their desired condition, and actions to achieve this. However the status of this plan is unclear and it is incomplete. The EIA and associated Environmental and Forest Mangement Plan details operations focussing on harvest operations. These documents together are strong on overarching vision, strong on governance and process, and provide detail on specific aspects of management, however, there is no clear and simple articulation of the objectives of forest management that indicate clearly what managers intend to achieve. The Iwokrama Forest mangement plan remains incomplete. There is not a clear statement of management objectives (note link to monitoring). The Environmental Forest Management Plan has been updated. The Annual plan of operations for 2009 has been completed and approved by GFC. The Firview management plan is not yet completed. The timber operation is developing quickly and demand the attention of Iwokrama staff, but in the absence of an overall vision, plan and clear objectives it is not clear that this is developing in a coherent and compatible way with other management projects.

The management plan and supporting documents shall provide a description of the forest resources to be managed and environmental limitations. There is a clear description of the area under management control. The area is described in detail and mapped in the EIA. Iwokrama International Centre has a GIS system. Environmental forest management plan updated. Area described.

Y Y

There is a description of the physical aspects of the management area (e.g. topography, soils, geology, and water resources), appropriate to the scale and intensity of the forest and management programme. There is good description of these in the EIA volume II - Overview, Baseline and Assessment. Some limitations were identified in the assessment of water resources. As MA

Y Y

There is a clear description of any areas under management control, which are excluded from harvesting, for whatever reasons. The Wilderness area and areas excluded from the Sustainable Use Area giving rise to the Nett Operable Area are clearly mapped. No change

Y Y

Areas that have been harvested in the past are known, and are marked as such on maps. No areas have been harvested in the past. However, areas planned for harvesting are clearly mapped, and these will provide a basis for reviewing historic Y harvesting in the future together with detailed data on species and volumes removed. Harvesting has now commneced. Areas worked are mapped to the level of individual trees harvested. Y

There is an evaluation of the timber resource (inventory), sufficient in detail and rigour & designed and executed according to established technical criteria , to justify the planned harvesting for the full rotation, and to demonstrate convincingly that yields will be permanently sustainable in successive rotations. The inventory has estimates to calculate the future forest structure & composition at least until the end of the 1st cutting cycle, based on an assessment of the FMU. (GNIFCd3 7.1.2). (see also Criterion 5.6) There is a detailed inventory for areas in which harvesting is planned. Permanent Sample Plots have been established and plans are in place for monitoring Y them. There is a description of "The silvicultural system and the sustainability of timber production" which describes the anticipated effects of harvesting over the proposed 60 year cutting cycle. Ongoing inventory Y

The management plan and supporting documents shall provide a description of land use and ownership status, socio-economic conditions, and a profile of adjacent lands. 7 .1.7 There is a description of the land use and ownership status, including a brief summary of previous use and ownership status. There is a good description of adjacent land use, and use is indicated on GIS maps. This includes the area where the Fairview Community recently established title. There are detailed studies and descriptions of local communities, their demography, socio economic conditions,and uses of the forest by local communities. Land use and ownership outlined in the co-management agreement. No change

There is a description of the socio-economic context for management. There are detailed studies and descriptions of local communities, their demography, socio economic conditions,and uses of the forest by local communities. Y Community information updated, Fairview Management plan nearing completion. Y

The forest management plan should include a section on the FMOs social policy concerning local and indigenous communities. This section should include the identification of potential negative impacts and a description of existing cultural diversity.(GNIFCd3 3.6.1) EIA Vol III Environmental & Forestry Management Plan secion 3.5 gives Company Policy. As MA plus Fairview management plan nearing completion.

Y Y

There is a description of adjacent land use There is a detailed description of adjacent communities and land use, as well as governance structures and socio economic conditions. As MA plus Fairview management plan nearing completion.

Y Y

The management plan and supporting documents shall provide a description of the silvicultural and/or other management system, based on the ecology of the forest in question and information gathered through resource inventories The silvicultural system on which management is based is clearly stated and justified in terms of the ecology of the forest. EIA vol III sections 5.2 and 5.3 give a brief description of Silviculture and Forest Use Organisation, this is supplemented by Document "Harvesting Timber Y from the Iwokrama Forest: The silvicultural system and the sustainability of timber production" provides detail, with RIL guidelines providing additional detail on practical aspects of impementation. EIA vol III sections 5.2 and 5.3 updated. G Y

The management prescriptions and procedures required to implement the silvicultural system are clearly stated, as, for example: - identification and marking of trees to be retained for future extraction, as seed sources, or to maintain biodiversity; - selection criteria of trees for felling; - method of marking trees or area selected for felling - method of ensuring regeneration; Details are given in Document "Harvesting Timber from the Iwokrama Forest: The silvicultural system and the sustainability of timber production" provides detail, with RIL guidelines providing additional detail on practical aspects of impementation. As Ma

Y Y

The management plan and supporting documents shall provide rationale for rate of annual harvest and species selection There are Annual Harvesting Plans based on detailed maps that include volumes or number of trees to extract in determined areas, planning of harvesting and silvicultural treatments, and other activities such as road construction. This plan indicates where and when and how the activities will be executed. (GNIFCd3 7.1.3) There is a study of growth and yield modelling for Guyana by D. Alder. Tropenbos research documents are also available. Annual harvesting plan is based Y on 100% inventory of commercial stocking which gives species and volumes, with predicted tree removal based on RIL and CoP criteria (eg proximity). Skid trail planning and log market (log collection areas) are planned and mapped on GIS. No change Y

Operational level inventories are conducted that provide the basis for planning and execution of the annual harvest. (GNIFCd3 7.1.5) 100% inventory

100% inventory of merchantable stems

The management plan and supporting documents shall provide provisions for monitoring of forest growth and dynamics. Procedures for monitoring forest regeneration and growth are documented and implemented. There is a procedure for Permanent Sample Plots that will monitor forest regeneration and growth in harvested and non harvested areas, together with pre- Y harvest inventory completed and post harvest inventory to be completed once an area has been worked. Need to check that procedures are fully implemented at surveillance. PSP plots visited, procedures being implemented. Note observations under Criterion 5.6 and Principle 8 with regard to evaluating areas post harvest. Y

The annual plan, together with the maps are available to provide operative guidance to the management activities and to facilitate the monitoring of activities execution.(GNIFCd3 7.1.6) There are high quality GIS maps with hard copies held in the field identifying all trees evaluated in th einventory - location, species, availability for felling; Y skidding tails and log markets are mapped. Maps were seen to be well used in the field by IIC & TGI staff. Detailed maps in seen use on a daily basis in the field. Y

The silvicultural prescriptions established in the forest management plan are executed in the field. (GNIFCd3 7.1.7) Field inspection showed good implmentation of planned operations, and implementation of RIL techniques. High quality implementation of RIL harvesting seen throughout areas harvested in the last year.

Y Y

The management plan and supporting documents shall provide: Environmental safeguards based on environmental assessments. The need for fire management and control has been evaluated and is documented.

Fire Risk is considered in EIA Volume II section 1.8.8.4. Risk is considered greatest to the southern margins of the forest where it meets the savannah of the Y North Rupununi. It notes that ITI will develop a fire management programme including training, public awareness, monitoring, prevention, communication, co-ordination and suppression techniques. Vol III section 7.2.2 provided greater detail on each of these aspects. Iwokrama is also collaborating with the GFC on an ITTO funded project looking at fire management. Implementation of this project and planned measures should be evaluated at surveillance. There may be fire risk associated with build up of sawmill residue and offcuts at the mill site. Sawmill residue and offcuts at site seen at MA no longer present a fire risk having been disposed of through controlled burning. However, with a substantial increase in harvesting volume and occupation at the new mill site, there is potential for increased fire risk. This does not appear to have been evaluated and contingency plans are not clear. N

Environmental safeguards based on environmental assessments are implemented. There is a detailed Environmental Impact Assessment and Management Plan - 3 volumes. The plan is being implemented. However implementation of management was not fully in compliance with the Environmental Permit at the time of the audit. There is no evidence of a full evaluation of the environmental impacts of the development of the mill site (the original environmental management plan envisaged a much smaller operation with two mobile mills processing a maximum of 6000cum pa the new site is substantially larger.

N N

The management plan and supporting documents shall provide: Plans for the identification and protection of rare, threatened and endangered species. The management plan (including subsequent revisions) and supporting documents shall provide plans for the identification, protection & ongoing evaluation of the status of rare, threatened and endangered species. Vol II section 2 includes a review o the Environmental Baseline with detailed descriptions of key species and habitat types, in addition consideration is given to ecosystems outside the forest area. No change

Y Y

The management plan and supporting documents shall provide: Maps describing the forest resource base including protected areas, planned management activities and land ownership. There are maps showing the forest resource base including protected areas.

Good quality GIS maps indicate Wilderness Preserve Area clearly, as well as distribution of different forest types, and the habitats. No change

Y Y

There are maps showing land ownership which are accessible, clear and usable. Maps are excellent although the discrepency on the size of the Iwokrama area is noted. Tenure is clearly shown. Maps also show location of adjacent communities and their lands. No change

Y Y

There are maps showing planned management activities in the short (e.g. less than five years) and medium (for example 5 20 years) term. Y Good quality GIS maps indicate compartments currently being logged and those to be worked in the medium term (next 20 years), plus area to be worked over the next 5-7 years with more detailed maps based on 100% inventory for annual working areas. Harvest maps were avaialable and in regular use on site to support operations. Maps updated and in use. Y

The management plan shall be periodically revised to incorporate the results of monitoring or new scientific and technical information, as well as to respond to changing environmental, social and economic circumstances. The FMP is periodically reviewed (at least each five years) to include the results of monitoring. (GNIFCd3 7.2.1). Environmental and Forest Management Plan has been revised to take into account changes in the context of management. However, the current edition has not been formally approved by the GFC see discussion under 1.1. Plan has been revised in the last year to take into account input fromlocal community in relation to scheduling of works.

Y Y

Managers are aware of relevant scientific and technical research being undertaken or planned in the area, e.g. concerning forest management, timber production and biology/ecology as well as the changes in the environmental, social and economic context. (GNIFCd3 7.2.1)

Managers have good access to research information from Guyana and from other countries. In some respects (in particular social) Iwokrama (IIC) is carrying innovative research and incorporating the findings into management approaches. Ongoing research programme.

Y Y

There is a system to review management in relation to socio-economic conditions and trends There is regular ongoing consultation with local communities of Fairview and the wider NRDDB, and co-management/collaborative management agreements in place (expiration of NRDDB agreement noted). The review of management within the Fairview community tenure area is an example of reviewing management in relation to socio economic change. There is ongoing consultation and systems for engaging with local people continue to operate and develop (eg collabortaive management agreements).

There is evidence that significant findings of such research, as well as the results of monitoring by the forest management enterprise, are incorporated into updated policies, plans and procedures. Environmental and Forest Management Plan has been revised to take into account changes in the context of management. The plan references research and Y monitoring results known and takes these into account. Monitoring protocols have been recently revised, there will be a need to incorporate findings into revised management plans and the system for this is not clear. There has been a participatory planning process for the Fairview community tenure area, a management plan for this has not yet been produced though is in process. On going consultation with the local community has resulted in a revision to plan of operations an dteh Environmental Management plan has been revised Y in the lst year. Monitoring protocols have not yet been fully implemented so the Recommendation remains open.

Forest workers shall receive adequate training and supervision to ensure proper implementation of the management plan. Managers and supervisors shall have qualification, training or experience appropriate to the scale and intensity of the operation sufficient to enable them to plan and organise forest operations and other elements of the management plan Managers are highly qualified including PhD, and University Degree qualifications, and an appropriate range of skills (social, environmental and technical) and practical forest management experience. All key management staff were well qualified and experienced. Managers employed have appropriate qualifications, though there is limited experience of managing timber operations among some middle grade staff, this is being addressed through training programmes and on the job training.

Y Y

All workers receive training relevant to their tasks and responsibilities. Training records were inspected. There has been a comprehensive series of training courses including subjects such as RIL, Harvesting Management, Directional Felling, FSC requirements, Health and Safety, Biodiversity Convention, CITIES, ILO requirements and employment rights. Recently hired workers at the mill site had not received induction or training relevant to the operation and to their tasks.

There are records of training provided to forest workers. Training records are kept and were inspected. Egs include RIL, Harvesting Management, Directional Felling, FSC requirements, Health and Safety, Y Biodiversity Convention, CITIES, ILO requirements and employment rights, tour guiding, Ranger skills. Training records held and inspected. Regular courses have been held throughout the year - tehre will be an ongoing need for this as new staff/workers join Y the operation. Training also organised with communities.

Appropriate to the scale and intensity of the operation there is a policy and plan for training, qualifications, and recruitment that includes skill and experience the basis for recruitment, placement, training and advancement of staff at all levels. IIC and TGI are guided by a Human Resources Manual (Policies & Procedures, March 2006). The NRDDB was also involved in recruitment issues for the local communities HR policy and timetabke for training produced. However, staff at mill site had not received approriate training. See 2009.17.

Y Y

Field guides are available for use in the different field operations for the training of the workers. (GNIFCd3 7.3.2) Codes of practice, Work instructions and Guides were noted in offices and in the field, and training records demonstrated that these had been referred to and used during training sessions. Good general availability of guides/codes at head office, field station, and mill site.

Y Y

There is supervision of field activities to assure that the operative norms are duly implemented. (GNIFCd3 7.3.3). Training has been carried out at different levels within the organisation and there is good supervision of staff in the field. However, the capability & procedure by which IIC staff can adequately control TGI staff is unclear. Generally there is good co-operation between Iwokrama and joint venture partner and Iwokrama have devoted staff to field supervision. Some concern remains in relation to ensuring compliance with Health and Safety Norms, and Road Building Norms. These are dealt with under CARs 2007.09 and 2007.17. As it is Iwokrama's own interest to ensure high standards of safety management on site this CAR remains open.

Y N

The field, technical and administrative middle management personnel has adequate information for the implementation of the management plan. (GNIFCd3 7.3.4). All staff interviewed displayed good understanding of their roles and responsibilities in relation to implementation of management and of FSC certification Y requirements in relation to their work area. Most staff had good understanding of their roles. A number of new staff had been appointed (eg monitoring staff) training had been carried out and there Y is likely to be an ongoing need for this.

While respecting the confidentiality of information, forest managers shall make publicly available a summary of the primary elements of the management plan, including those listed in Criterion 7.1 above A summary of management activities is available to all interested parties, within the accepted norms of commercial confidentiality. [N.B. A summary of the main elements of the management plan listed in Criterion 7.1 above will be included in Soil Associations public summary of the evaluation, if a certificate is awarded] A public summary of management has been produced. However it does not provide information on all of the main elements listed in Criterion 7.1. The N accessibility of the public summary documents to local communities was questioned. Generally, notice and manner of advertisement of the public consultation for the audit was considered inadequate. Public summary available and many documents available publicly via comprehensive web page. However Summary does not include main elements N listed in Criterion 7.1.

FSC PRINCIPLE #8: MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT Monitoring shall be conducted -- appropriate to the scale and intensity of forest management -- to assess the condition of the forest, yields of forest products, chain of custody, management activities and their social and environmental impacts. The frequency and intensity of monitoring should be determined by the scale and intensity of forest management operations as well as the relative complexity and fragility of the affected environment. Monitoring procedures should be consistent and replicable over time to allow comparison of results and assessment of change. There is an implemented system for monitoring the impacts of forest operations. Iwokrama (IIC) has invested significant staff time and resources into research and monitoring of the forest resource over the last ten years. There have been various studies and monitoring protocols proposed and implemented, and detailed Biophysical monitoring protocols have been prepared. A detailed and thorough review of monitoring is presented in a draft document "Iwokrama Integrated Monitoring System" (IIMS) (20 mar 07). This makes a number of important observations including but not limited to: a) that monitoring proposals in the past have tended to focus on technical or biophysical aspects with limited attention to social or socio economic/ecological aspects; b) that community and partner organisations need to be incorporated into monitoring systems; c) that monitoring programmes can become very demanding of resources; d) that as a consequence of c data is often not analysed and thereby not always effectively used. The IIMS provides a framework for development of monitoring protocols some of which are already implemented, some of which are developed but not yet fully implemented and some have yet to be developed and have not been implemented or fully incorporated into a fully coherent monitoring plan. Even though detailed, the monitoring was not fully comprehensive to take cognizance of the requirements of the EMP. The IIMS makes another critical observation p33 "One usually determines what data to collect based on specific objectives". This in turn would normally be derived from a systematic evaluation of what the most important attributes of the forest resource are and an evaluation of purpose of the managing organisation. i.e. management objectives should reflect a combination of what is imporant about the forest and what managers wish to achieve. Clear objectives lead to clarity in monitoring regimes. Under Criterion 7.1 above it is noted that Forest Management Objectives are not clear. This is possibly reflected in the large number of attributes identified for monitoring. In order for Iwokrama to develop further clarity in the development of its IIMS it would appear that a fundamental evaluation of key forest attributes and organisational purpose would help to clarify management objectives and thereby help to clarify and focus and possibly simplify the associated monitoring regime sufficiently to make its implementation meaningful, practical and affordable. Note also observations under Criterion 9.4 regarding the identification and prioritisation of HCVF attributes and their monitoring. The IIMS is currently incomplete and not yet fully implemented. N Monitoring remains problematic for Iwokrama. This is partly due to lack of clarity about what to monitor as the management plan remains incomplete and N objectives are not clear (monitoring should relate to objectives which in turn should be derived form an evaluation of the most important features/aspects). It is also a consequence of the IIMS remaining incomplete.

3.08

The frequency and expense of monitoring is appropriate to the scale and intensity of forest management operations as well as the relative complexity and fragility of the affected environment.

See comments under 8.1.1 above. There may be some aspects included within the IIMS for which the cost:benefit of gathering data is not clear, equally there may be a need to improve the power of other protocols to detect changes identified as important a priori (eg Line transect estimators for example require hundreds of observations to achieve a satisfactory power). In addition it is not clear that the frequency and expense of monitoring can be considered appropriate if it is not fully implemented to the scale and intensity of the operations under 8.1.1. Nevertheless, current implementation and plans include a full range of monitoring activities, carried out at defined frequencies and level of resource allocation that is at least appropriate to the complexity and fragility of the forest resource. Examples include: Routine monitoring of road use - 2 ranger stations, wildlife sightings, road/bridge/culvert condition; River monitoring - river level, wildlife sightings, Y mining encroachment; Airstrip monitoring - condition, litter, vegetation; Climatic - rain, humidity, temperature; Timber harvesting - impact monitoring for fauna and flora, pre harvest and post harvest inventory, PSPlots, proposed water quality testing; Research permanent sample plots; Phenology transects; Infrastructure monitoring and facilties - vistors, waste, security, illegal occupations, cleanliness, maintenance records, Energy consumption and solar power. There are proposals for socio economic indicatiors to be monitored including food consumption, alchohol sales, NTFPs harvested, health (eg HIV, STDs, Malaria, vomiting/diarrhoea), vists form logging camp to villages, use of safety gear, crime. Ongoing monitoring - files inspected. However see observation under 8.1.1 Y

Procedures are consistent and replicable over time to allow comparison and assessment of change. Some studies carried out in the past have not been replicable, some will not have provided effective baseline data although others may have been appropriate as baseline studies. Some protocols have yet to be developed and implemented, however protocols have been developed that should ensure consistent replication. Protocols that have been developed are being implemented in a consistent manner and there are regular summary reports. However note observation under 8.1.1.

Monitoring records are maintained in a well-ordered, up-to-date and accessible form. There has been a systematic review of research and monitoring done in the past. A filing system has been developed. However, taking into account that new protocols have yet to be developed and implemented, and there will be a need to improve the way in which these are managed, collated and maintained. Records inspected were well filed, maintained and up to date. However note observations under 8.1.1

Forest management should include the research and data collection needed to monitor: Yield of all forest products harvested. Yields of all forest products harvested are recorded. Details of all timber felled is recorded and reconciled to the 100% inventory data collected prior to harvesting. Production and shipping records are collated. On site records inspected. Production summary records inspected. Production records inspected. Detailed records of individual trees felled are kept and closely monitored.

3 Y Y

Forest management should include the research and data collection needed to monitor: Growth rates, regeneration and condition of the forest. Where standard growth models or information on regeneration of commercial species is not known, there is a programme in place to collect detailed information for future management. 100% inventory carried out prior to harvesting. Post harvesting evaluation. Existing research data has been analysed and studies have been carried out (eg Y Alder 2000, Zagt 1997, Arets, van der Hout, Zagt 2003) and reviewed by IIC Trevin (2007). A system of PSPs is being established. Note need to evaluate implementation of PSPs at surveillnace. PSP plots have been established ane were inspected. Post harvest inventory is planned and methodology designed, though not yet implemented as first harvesting cycle has not been completed (due 2009). It is noted that inventory does not take account of non merchantable (eg hollow) trees and that as such the contribution that such trees make to the overall population dynamics and ecology of the forest is not evaluated. See recommendation 2009.15.

The condition of the forest (presence of pests, diseases, evidence of soil compaction, erosion etc) is regularly monitored and reviewed. Volume and Decay study, implementation of Code of Practice, and Post harvest evaluation cover these aspects. Post harvest inventory not yet completed.

Y N

Forest management should include the research and data collection needed to monitor: The composition and observed changes in the flora and fauna. Conservation areas (see 6.2) are regularly monitored to ensure that there is no evidence of deterioration or disturbance.

There is monitoring of rare and endangered speciesand, gathering data on wildlife sightings both routine and non routine. There is limited provision for montioring of forest condition in the Wilderness Preserve Area though this may be picked up in PSP establishment which plans to establish plots in areas of forest that will not be disturbed as well as areas where harvesting is planned. Patrols by river, ranger patrols, combined with a community based incident reporting system serve to identify potential disturbance. Ongoing species monitring

Forest managers provide for monitoring of the effects of forestry operations on plant and animal species, including aquatic habitats (names, abundance, distribution, habitat requirements, biology, ecology, behaviour), commensurate with the extent and intensity of the forest management, and the rarity and fragility of the forest ecosystem and known species within it.. There is a monitoring protocol for rare and endangered species. This includes aquatic habitats. There is a plan to establish monitoring of water quality and Y the effect of forest operations on streams passing through logged areas. Monitoring being implemented although water quality monitoring not yet implemented. See 2007.24 Y

Records are kept on observations of key faunal species (large predators, terrestrial birds, deer, tapir, monkeys esp. spider monkeys, macaws, turtles etc.) (GNIFCd3 8.2.2) Routine and non-routine wildlife sightings are recorded, Phenology transects, Road and River monitoring reports, field logbooks are kept at ranger stations, logging camp, field station, canopy walkway. Monitoring protocols explicitly consider the species listed under this indicator plus others such as understorey bats. caiman spp.

Forest management should include the research and data collection needed to monitor: Environmental and social impacts of harvesting and other operations. There are meetings with representatives of local communities, at which any concerns regarding the social or environmental impacts of operations are recorded. There are regular meetings with communities (NRDDB) and written co-management/collaborative management agreements. There has been a Y participatory management planning process with Fairview community and zoning management consultations and consultation with local communities on the management plan. There is clear ongoing collaboration with local communities. Further social monitoring protocols are planne for implementation.

Regular meetings with NRDDb and Fairview ongoing and minuted. Meetings under auspices of ISTI used to discuss issues relating to the impact of harvesting operations upon the local community. This has resulted in changes to the shedule of operations in response to community requests.

There is a systematic evaluation of the impacts of forest management on the quality of life of the workers. (GNIFCd3 8.2.4). Social impacts of forest management are included in the EIA. Medical facilities are provided and aspects of health monitored. Social monitoring protocols include consideration of health and well being of workers.There are awareness programmes for HIV, Malaria, STDs. There has not been a systematic evaluation of the impacts of the new mill site.

Y N

Monitoring programmes are implemented to collect data related to environmental impacts. Such data might relate to: water quality, seasonal water flow, fish populations, wildlife populations. Monitoring protocols specific to harvesting impact include pre and post harvesting stand evaluations, water quality monitoring as required by EPA, fauna Y and flora assessments. Other monitoring protocols should also pick up issues in relation to harvesting egs wildlife and aquatic life monitoring as well as social and health aspects. No change Y

Forest management should include the research and data collection needed to monitor: Costs, productivity, and efficiency of forest management. There are clear financial accounts for the forest enterprise. There are audited accounts. Audited accounts for 2007 inspected , draft accounts for 2008 inspected.

There is an evaluation of the productivity and efficiency of the forest management enterprise.

Iwokrama have commenced a process of establishing/estimating costs and incomes for the timber operation. However Iwokrama do not have direct access N to this data as this is implemented by the joint venture partner. Iwokrama have produced an evaluation of the likely costs and incomes for the timber operation as part of the EIA process, however, this differs from the assessment and actual costs of the joint venture partner. Outside of the direct timber harvesting there has not been an evaluation of costs incurred that are required to service the forest management operation (i.e. there is no clear cost centre for activities that might be attributed the forest operation as opposed to other IIC activities ). Iwokrama therefore currently have no basis upon which to evaluate productivity and efficiency. To some extent this is a direct consequence of the fact that harvesting has only recently commenced. However in the context of Iwokrama as a model for other forest managers in relation to demonstration of sustainable forest management including economic performance this is an important omission. Financial information is being collected by Iwokrama. There remains lack of transparency in relation to joint venture partner and there is a consequent lack N of information available for local communities to make economic decisions with free and informed consent.

Documentation shall be provided by the forest manager to enable monitoring and certifying organisations to trace each forest product from its origin, a process known as the "chain of custody." Forest products that are to sold as certified are readily identifiable as originating from the evaluated forest. This may be achieved through physical marking of the timber, a system of paper control, daily or weekly production records, or a combination of these and similar techniques. Log tags are issued by the GFC for each tree to be felled. Each tree is individually identified and numbered on the 100% inventory. Trees are felled Y according to species to satisfy particular orders. Upon felling each tree and stump is identified with GFC tag no and inventory number. Logs derived from each tree are also numbered. Dimension, volume and quality are recorded. Logs entering the sawmill are recorded in sawmilling records and out put volumes/dimensions recorded. Dimensioned timber produced is numbered using the original log tag number and the tag attached to timber packs. Lorry collects ordered timber and species, quantity, dimensions loaded are recorded, delivery documents and GFC removal permit are associated with loads transported. Loads are then delivered to processing facility distant from forest or delivered directly to local buyers. Some sales occur at the mill site Chain of custody system reviewed in detail. Documents & physical identification demonstrating movement of logs from forest to sawmill show clear Y control. Mill site production records reconcile well with inputs and outputs. Tag control and tag records present a challenge once log has been milled, as tag is intended to accompany log during transport, whilst in the Iwokrama/TGI case, sawn product is transported. Iwokrama/TGI have developed a system that adapts tag use to sawn lumber by controlling production closely and allocating tags to appropriate species and volumes. This requires a system for allocating tags to shipments. Allocation of tags inspected was done appropriately. Tags not allocated were inspected and in stock. There is a theoretical possibility that unsued tags could be substituted e.g. (issued for trees that are not felled or not merchantable being used for trees or timber that is not planned for harvesting or has come from elsewhere). There is no suggestion that this has occurred, indeed tag control was good. However, allocation of tag to timber for transport is a critical control point and the tag control system could be improved toensure that unused tags are removed from stock at the mill site.

The forest management enterprise maintains control of the chain of custody of the timber up to the point of sale. Ownership in the timber passes from Iwokrama to TGI once the tree is felled (i.e. at stump). Iwokrama maintain control to this point. Iwokrama maintain legal control to the point of felling. They continue to closely monitor timber removals from site and monitor tag use.

Y Y

Invoices issued for certified timber sales specify: - The source of the certified timber - the date of sale - the quantity of certified timber sold - the specifications (species, dimensions, quality) of certified timber sold - the point at which the buyer shall take control of the chain of custody of the certified timber - certificate code - correspond to details on delivery documents Invoices are issued by ISTI for onward payment to ITI. However ITI will be the FSC certified entity. Invoices do not explicitly include all details given under this indicator eg delivery doc cross ref, certificate code (not yet issued), point of transfer of ownership/responsibility. Invoices will need to be adjusted accordingly upon receipt of FSC certificate code. Invoices include certificate code and compartment of origin. However, they are based on a minimum flat rate payment on a monthly basis and do not detail quantity of timber sold, specifications, or cross reference to delivery documents. They do not therefore act as clear evidence of ownership of specific timber as FSC certified for the buyer.

The results of monitoring shall be incorporated into the implementation and revision of the management plan. There is evidence that the results of monitoring are incorporated into the implemetation and revision of the management plan. There is evidence to demonstrate that the results of research and monitoring have been incorporated into management plans (eg reviews in Environmental Y Management Plan), however ongoing monitoring has yet to be fully implemented and the management has not yet undergone periodic revision following implementation of the first plan period. It is anticipated that monitoring protocols will feed into management planning. Clear evidence of this will be required at future surveillance visits. Monitoring protocols have not been completed and the monitoring programme is consequently not fully implemented. N

While respecting the confidentiality of information, forest managers shall make publicly available a summary of the results of monitoring indicators, including those listed in Criterion 8.2. Forest managers agree to make the results and/or a summary of the monitoring programmes available to all interested parties, within the accepted norms of commercial confidentiality, on request. A summary of monitoring activities has been produced. This describes approaches, rationale, key activities and highlights findings. It notes collabortaive Y research and monitoring activities and that results are shared with other agencies. The document is available on the Iwokrama web page, it provides links to other associated documents, and notes that monitoring protocols are accessible. The document also describes collaborative research and monitoring activity outside the forest area in partnership with local communities. The explanation of the share-benefits to the local communities needs attention see criteria 2.2 and 5.1 . No change Y

FSC PRINCIPLE #9: MAINTENANCE OF HIGH CONSERVATION VALUE FORESTS Management activities in high conservation value forests shall maintain or enhance the attributes that define such forests. Decisions regarding high conservation value forests shall always be considered in the context of a precautionary approach. High Conservation Value Forests are those that possess one or more of the following attributes: a) forest areas containing globally, regionally or nationally significant : - concentrations of biodiversity values (e.g. endemism, endangered species, refugia); and/or - large landscape level forests, contained within, or containing the management unit, where viable populations of most if not all naturally occurring species exist in natural patterns of distribution and abundance b) forest areas that are in or contain rare, threatened or endangered ecosystems c) forest areas that provide basic services of nature in critical situations (e.g. watershed protection, erosion control) d) forest areas fundamental to meeting basic needs of local communities (e.g. subsistence, health) and/or critical to local communities traditional cultural identity (areas of cultural, ecological, economic or religious significance identified in co-operation with such local communities). Assessment to determine the presence of the attributes consistent with High Conservation Value Forests will be completed, appropriate to scale and intensity of forest management. Forest managers are able to provide a definition of High Conservation Value Forest for their region. The criteria used to define these areas are listed in the Management Plan . (GNIFCd3 9.3.1).

3.5

The FSC definition described above has been adopted, and analysed using the ProForest Toolkit approach to criteria for evaluation (see definitions in Annex 7 of Woodmark Generic Standard adapted for use in Guyana). These are reviewed in Iwokrama document "High Conservation Values in Iwokrama". No change

Forest managers have assessed whether High Conservation Value Forests is present in the area under their control. These are reviewed in Iwokrama document "High Conservation Values in Iwokrama". The entire area is considered to be HCVF based on a combination of Y factors including: Iwokrama has been declared a Protected Area, it contains concentrations of threatened and endangered species (egs Jaguar, Giant otter, caiman), it contains endemic species, it is a large landscape level forest containing viable populations, it provides basic services in relation to watersheds, and meets traditional and cultural needs of local Amerindian communities. These have been sytematically reviewed. No change Y

Areas identified as High Conservation Value Forests are marked on maps. The entire area is mapped (and considrered an HCVF by the FMO) and a range of forest types and attributes are GIS mapped. No change

Y Y

The consultative portion of the certification process must place emphasis on the identified conservation attributes, and options for the maintenance thereof. Forest managers shall consult with relevant stakeholders on the identification of High Conservation Values and management options for any High Conservation attributes identified. Consultation has been carried out with national agencies and local communities, these are reported in zoning document, management planning documents, EIA, and participatory management sessions held with the local community. Consultation has included consideration of biodiversity values, landscape level services and community/cultural issues. There is ongoing consultation with stakeholders and relevant authorities.

The management plan shall include and implement specific measures that ensure the maintenance and/or enhancement of the applicable conservation attributes consistent with the precautionary approach. These measures shall be specifically included in the publicly available management plan summary. Specific protection measures are detailed and implemented in the Management Plan for identified High Conservation Value areas and/or attributes. Management planning documents include consideration of the HCV attributes identified, this includes zoning, establishment of a Wilderness Preserve area, and management approaches to each of the attributes. No change Y Y

The identified protection measures adopt a precautionary approach. Overall management is precationary in approach, intervention is anticipated in less than 30% of the overall forest area, RIL techniques minimise forest disturbance. In addition specific measures are identified for protection of particular attributes eg protection of water resources, protection of cultural values. However note comments under 7.1 Objectives, and 8.1 Monitoring, There is scope to improve clarity of objectives, particularly in relation to biodiversity, and thereby associated monitoring. No change

The identified protection measures are included in the publicly available management plan. Management activities are summarised in the summary of management and the whole Iwokrama Forest management plan is publicly available. No change

Y Y

Annual monitoring shall be conducted to assess the effectiveness of the measures employed to maintain or enhance the applicable conservation attributes. A programme of at least annual monitoring, appropriate to the size and vulnerability of the conservation attributes, is documented and implemented. Periodicity of monitoring varies according to attribute with many observations being made more frequently than annually.

There is monitoring and a set of monitoring protocols has been established. Some of these have yet to be implemented in accordance with GFC and EPA requirements. There is also scope to better clarify objectives and the associated monitoring. Use of the HCVF attribute assessment could be better used to inform the content and prioritisation of monitoring programmes. No change

No plantation present At Iwokrama - Principle therefore not applicable. FSC PRINCIPLE #10: PLANTATIONS Plantations shall be planned and managed in accordance with Principles and Criteria 1 - 9, and Principle 10 and its Criteria. While plantations can provide an array of social and economic benefits, and can contribute to satisfying the world's needs for forest products, they should complement the management of, reduce pressures on, and promote the restoration and conservation of natural forests.

#REF!

CAR

2007.1

2007.1

2007.33

Closed

2009.01

2009.02

2009.03

2007.3

2009.04

2007.3

2007.33

Closed

2007.5

Raised

2007.5 2007.6

2007.34

2007.35

2007.7

2009.05

2007.36

2007.36

2007.28

2009.06

2009.06

2007.8 Closed 2009.07

2007.8

2007.8

2009.07

2007.9

2007.9

2007.9

2007.9

2007.9

2007.9

2007.9

2009.08

2007.9

2009.09

2007.9

2009.09

2009.10.

2009.10.

2009.10.

2007.2

2009.11

2009.11

2007.29

Closed

2007.29

Closed

2007.29

Closed

2007.29

Closed

2007.11'

2009.12

raised

2007.11 2007.10.

Raised

2007.12

Closed

2007.10'

2007.13

Closed

2007.14

2009.13

2009.14

2007.30'

2009.16

2007.15

2007.16

2007.16

2007.16

2007.17

Raised

2007.17

Raised

2007.13

Closed

2009.17

2007.18

Raised

2007.18

Raised

2007.18 Raised

2007.18 Raised

2007.19

Raised

2007.19 Raised

2007.19 Raised

2007.19

Raised

2007.20'

Raised

2007.21

Raised

2007.30' Raised 2009.16

2007.22

Open

2009.17

2007.31 Raised

2007.23

Raised

2007.24 Raised

2007.24

2007.24

Raised

2009.15

2009.06 2009.11

2007.25

Raised

Rec 2009.18

2007.26

Raised

2007.32

Raised

see 7.1, 8.1

2007.27

Raised

Annex 2 Stakeholder report Contact surveillance 1 Contact surveillance 2 Contact surveillance 3 Contact surveillance 4

Organisation Fairview Community North Rupununu District Development Board Demerera Timbers Ltd. WWF Guyana Environmental Protection Agency Guyana Forestry Commission Forestry Dept. University of Guyana Forestry Training Centre Inc.

Name c20 community members North Rupununu District Development Board Then Guang Yaw Patrick Williams, Haidy Malone Lepelblad Doorga Persaud, Khalid Alladin Edward Goberdhan Mohindra Chand, Pradeepa Bholanauth Owen Bovell, Rhonda Urlin-Knights, Lawerence Lewis Godfrey Marshall Gary Clarke, Raquel Thomas, Annette Arjoon, Mona Bynoe, Dr. Gary Clarke, VWGL rep, Amerindian NGO Rep, Vanessa Benn & others

Form of contact Meeting Meeting Meeting Meeting Meeting Meeting Meeting Meeting

Date of contact PA PA PA PA PA PA PA PA

Jan-09 Jan-09 email email tel email email email

Guyana National Initiative for Forest Certification Government Guyana Forestry Commission (GFC) Environment Protection Agency (EPA) Ministry of Amerindian Affairs (MoAA) Ministry of Public Works (MoPW) Guyana Lands and Surveys Commission (GLSC)

Meeting

PA

email

James Singh, Commissioner of Forests Doorga Persaud, Executive Director Carolyn Rodrigues, Minister of Ameridian Affairs Robeson Benn, Minister of Public Works Andrew Bishop, Commissioner

Email Meeting Email Email Email Email

08/08/2007 14/09/2007

email 8/8/2007 email 8/8/2007 email 8/8/2007 email 8/8/2007 email

Guyana Geology and Mines Commission (GGMC) Guyana Police Force Guyana Defence Force Iwokrama direct stakeholders Fair View Village (communtiy within Iwokrama) North Rupununi District Development Board (NRDDB)- indigenous representation with 16 communities iwokrama associated Tigerwood Guyana Inc (joint venture partner) Sydney Allicock - Local Community Elder/Expert Other stakeholders WWF-Guianas Programme (donor towards certification) Chair, Guyana National Initiative for Forest Cerification (GNIFC) Janette Bulkan University of Guyana: Forestry Dept Ameridian Research Unit School of Earth Sciences Biology Dept Forest Products Association Amerindian NGOS:

William Woolford, Commissioner (Acting) Commissioner Henry Green Major General Edward Collins

Email Email Email

8/8/2007 email 8/8/2007 email 8/8/2007 email

Toshau Bradford Allicock (Village Captain)

Meeting

9/11/2007 Jan-09

William Andries, Chairman; Rodney Davis, Executive Director Kads Khan Directors Community Rep on Iwokrama Board of Trustees

Meeting Meeting Meetings

9/12/2007 Jan-09 9/10/2007 Jan-09 1014/09/2007 Jan-09

Dr Patrick Williams, Programme CoordinatorGuyana

Email Meeting Email Clayton Hall, Chairperson and Sharon Ousman Meeting Email Former Senior Social Scientist , Iwokrama Owen Bovell/Laurence Lewis George Simon Jenny Wishart Paulette Bynoe Mark Bynoe Calvin Bernard/Michelle Kalamandeen Mona Bynoe Email Email Email Email Email Email Email

9/12/2007 email 9/12/2007

8/8/2007 8/17/2007 8/17/2007 8/17/2007 8/17/2007 8/17/2007 8/17/2007

email email email auditor email email email

Amerindian Peoples Association (APA) Guyana Organisation of Indigenous People (GIOP) The Ameridian Action Momement of Guyana (TAAMOG) National Amerindian Development Foundation (NADF) Conservation NGOs: Conservation International -Guyana

Jean La Rose Ian Melville Peter Persaud Ashton Simon Dr Patrick Chesney/ Eustace Alexander

Email Email Email Email Email Email

8/8/2007 email 8/8/2007 email 8/17/2007 email 8/17/2007 email 8/17/2007 email 8/8/2007 email

Guyana Marine Turtle Conservation Society Annette Arjoon, Michelle Kalamandeen Centre for the Study of Biological Diversity, Department of Biology, University of Guyana and Guyana Marine Turtle Conservation Society (GMTCS) Michelle Kalamandeen Other Professionals: Forest Products Marketing Council Luvindra Sukhraj Guyana School of Agriculture Lynette Cunha

Email Email Email

8/17/2007 email 8/8/2007 email 8/17/2007 email FSC 8/8/2007 auditor 8/8/2007 email 8/8/2007 8/8/2007 8/8/2007 8/17/2007 8/17/2007 8/17/2007 8/8/2007 8/17/2007 email email email email email email email email

Consultant-Forestry Consultant - Environmental Studies Minister within Education Ministry, Cultural Anthropologist Consultant WWF WWF GPAS/KfW project GPAS/KfW project EPA EPA

Dr Gary Clarke Shyam Nokta Dr Desrey Fox Simone Mangal Odessa Duncan Aiesha Williams Damian Fernandes Ben ter Welle Dr Indarjit Ramdass Ramesh Lilwah

Email Email Email Email Email Email Email Email Email Email

GFC, Deputy Commissioner GFC, Botanist NRDDB reps: Indranee Roopsind FSC member FSC member FSC member NRDDB Meeting: Representing Surama Village Tourism Coordinator, NRDDB MYC & Surama Rep Exec Dir, NRDDB Coordinator, MRU Bina Hill Institute Director (BHI) North Rupununi Credit & Development Trust, Community Liasion Officer (BHI), Senior Councillor (Annai), Administrator (BHI) Volunteer (Radio Pamaiwok)

Tasreef Khan Sumedha Mahadeo Biologist Mr Clyde de Haas Mr Clayton Hall Mr Monty Sheik Niamataki

Email Email Email Email Email Email

8/17/2007 email 8/17/2007 email 8/17/2007 email 8/17/2007 email 8/17/2007 email 8/17/2007 email

Sydney Allicock Alphonso Forde Frank Allicock Rodney Davis Paulette Allicock

Meeting Meeting Meeting Meeting Meeting

9/12/2007 9/12/2007 9/12/2007 9/12/2007 9/12/2007

email email email email email

Vincent Henry Mike James Michael Williams Emily Allicock Virgil Harding

Meeting Meeting Meeting Meeting Meeting

Jan-09 9/12/2007 email 9/12/2007 email 9/12/2007 email 9/12/2007 email 9/12/2007 email

CATS (at Rock view) Indigenous Associations Guyanese organisation of Indigenous Peoples (GOIP) Legal Adviser, Amerindian Peoples Assn

Colin Edwards & Sydney Allicock

Meeting

9/12/2007 Jan-09

Colin Klautky David James

Meeting Meeting

9/14/2007 email 9/14/2007 email

TAAMOG Forest Products Assn - Sept 14 Guyana Wood Products Ltd CEO, Demerara Timbers Ltd Caribbean Resources Ltd Public Relations Consultant- FPA Exec Director, FPA MultiStakeholders EPA Guyana Lands & Surveys Commission Dept of Forestry, Faculty of Agriculture & Forestry, UG

Peter Persaud

Meeting

9/14/2007 email

Brian Gittens S.K. Chan Michael King Kit Nascimento Mona Bynoe

Meeting Meeting Meeting Meeting Meeting

9/14/2007 9/14/2007 9/14/2007 9/14/2007 9/14/2007

email email email email email

Khalid Alladin & Indira Mattai Andrea Mahammad Lawrence Lewis

Meeting Meeting Meeting

9/14/2007 email 9/14/2007 email 9/14/2007 email email & Jan 9/10/2007 09 9/10/2007 email 9/14/2007 email

Community Consultant Community Consultant GFC Commissioner Fairview Meeting Toshao (Captain) Councillor Macushi Research Unit Vice chairman & Farmer Housewife Community Health Worker Villager Pastor Boat Captain Villager

Vanda Radzig Simone Mangal James Singh

Meeting Phone Meeting

Bradford Allicock Augustine Andries Leonie Ewell Shirley Andries Celest Andries Sarah George John Ewell Norbert George Romdy (?) Alexander Margaret Williams

Meeting Meeting Meeting Meeting Meeting Meeting Meeting Meeting Meeting Meeting

9/11/2007 Jan-09 9/11/2007 Jan-09 9/11/2007 9/11/2007 9/11/2007 9/11/2007 9/11/2007 9/11/2007 9/11/2007 9/11/2007

Housewife Villager Villager Villager Housewife Youth Youth Housewife Housewife Assistant Chef Housewife Villager

Celestina Peters Celestine Leo Celina Andries Jean Andries Betina Ewell Nyota Peters Geraldine Peters Dora Leo Bernita Alexander Samatha Andries Jennifer Andries Raymond Edwards

Meeting Meeting Meeting Meeting Meeting Meeting Meeting Meeting Meeting Meeting Meeting Meeting

9/11/2007 9/11/2007 9/11/2007 9/11/2007 9/11/2007 9/11/2007 9/11/2007 9/11/2007 9/11/2007 9/11/2007 9/11/2007 9/11/2007

ANNEX 3 Species list English/local name - Latin Name All included within scope 1. Aromata Clathrotropis macrocarpa 2. Asepoko(balli) Pouteria guianensis, P. caimito 3. Awara Astrocaryum vulgare 4. Bamboo Guadua angustifolia 5. Baromalli, Sand Catostemma fragrans 6. Baromalli, Swamp Catostemma commune 7. Boba Socrotea exorrhiza 8. Brazil nut Bertholletia excelsa 9. Bulletwood Manilkara bidentata 10. Buruma Pourouma guianensis 11. Common Black Kakaralli Eschweilera sagotiana 12. Congo Pump Cecropia obtusa/sciadophylla 13. Crabwood Carapa guianensis 14. Dakama Dimorphandra conjugata 15. Freijo Cordia alliodora 16. Futui Jacaranda copaia 17. Greenheart Chlorocardium rodiei 18. Haiwa(balli)/Kurokai Tetragastris altissima, Protium decandrum 19. Ite Mauritia flexuosa 20. Kabukalli Goupia glabra 21. Kamahora Pouteria filipes etc 22. Kanakudiballi Cochlospermum orinocense 23. Karia Astrocaryum sciophilum 24. Kartang Centrolobium paraense 25. Kokorite Attalea maripa 26. Kokoritiballi Pouteria dura etc 27. Konoko Licania cuprea 28. Korokororo Ormosia coutinhoi

25. Kokorite Attalea maripa 26. Kokoritiballi Pouteria dura etc 27. Konoko Licania cuprea 28. Korokororo Ormosia coutinhoi 29. Kufa Clusia spp 30. Locust Hymenaea courbaril 31. Manicole Euterpe oleracea , E.precatoria 32. Maran Copaifera pubiflora 33. Marishiballi Licania buxifolia 34. Mora Mora excelsa 35. Morabukea Mora gonggrijpii 36. Muri Humiria balsamifera var guianensis 37. Nibbi Heteropsis spp 38. Purpleheart Peltogyne venosa 39. Sandpaper Tree Curatella americana 40. Sauwarai Astrocaryum jauari 41. Sawari Nut Caryocar nuciferum 42. Swamp Dalli Virola surnamensis 43. Trysil Pentaclethra macroloba 44. Turu Oenocarpus bataua 45. Wallaba, Clump Dicymbe altsonii 46. Wallaba, Soft Eperua falcata 47. Wallaba, Watapa Eperua rubiginosa 48. Wamara Swartzia leiocalycina 49. White Cedar Tabebuia insignis var monophylla

ANNEX 4 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION HELD BY WOODMARK: Copy Of Certificate And Associated Schedule Confidential Commercial Information Consultee list and copies of any responses sent to Woodmark Maps Showing the Forest Resource Base Copy of management plans Formal EIA for Iwokrama Third draft Guyana National Standard GNIFC Paper Aug 07 - harvesting timber from the Iwokrama Forest - th esilvicultural system and sustainability of timber production Paper Sept 07 - Forest Planning and management and conservation attributesin the Iwokrama forest List of chemicals used at field station Procedure for uplifting and using chemicals at the Iwokrama field station Chemical usse form Code of Practice for Timber Harvesting GFC Nov 2002 Forestry Training Centre Coures in reduced impact logging File list of all Iwokrama documents Public summary Iwokrama forest certification process Iwokrama Institutional arrangements Forest certification training schedule Healt and safety handbook HCV in Iwokrama Proforest evaluation - prelimmiinary comments Zoning of the Iwokrama reserve Draft summary process document North Rupununi populatin structure data Collaborative management agreement Co management agreement Additional electronic documents held

stainability of timber production

Notes on Economics Iwokrama Title and Organisation Full control of the Forest Area lies with Iwokrama International Centre (IIC). (c.371,000-21,950ha). Ownership of trees and timber in this lies with IIC (See below). Fairview Village have title on c.21,000ha. Ownership of trees and timber in this area lies with Fairview Village. Fairview Community has ceded the use and extraction of timber to ITI. IIC has formed company Iwokrama Timber Incorporated (ITI). The forest management responsibility has been ceded by IIC to Iwokrama Timber Incorporated (ITI) a subsidiary of IIC in which IIC holds 76% of shares, The North Rupununi Development Board owns 15% of shares and the Fairview Community owns 9% of shares. This division of shares is intended to take account of * Traditional use rights of the forest by the communities * Fairview title * Iwokrama (IIC) title The percentages have been agreed and negotiated with local communities and embodied in comanagement/collaborative management agreements.

ITI has in turn established with Tigerwood (Guyana) Inc. (TGI), Iwokrama Sustainable Timber Incorporated (ISTI), which is a joint venture company between ITI (51% shares) and TGI (49% shares). Tigerwood directly employs operational staff for harvesting and employs subcontractors e.g. for sawmilling and transport. Finances Royalty. IIC are not required to pay Royalty to Guyana Forestry Commission (GFC) for timber harvested. (Provision under Iwokrama Act). Under normal circumstances a timber concession would pay a royalty of between US$0.53 to US$2.47 per cu m depending upon species. Whilst ITI does not pay royalty to GFC it does collect from TGI an amount equivalent to the Royalty rate for each species using the GFC standard rates. These funds, along with the revenues from tax concessions which are allocated to a "Sustainable Development Fund", contribute to the costs of meeting FSC standard requirements. Stumpage. In addition ITI collects from TGI a stumpage fee based on Hoppus cu m. This rate is US$11.00 except for Greenheart and Purpleheart which is US$13.00. Community payment. ITI remit to Fairview US$1.00 per cu.m for all timber harvested. OR 9% of the profit made on operations of ISTI - Whichever is the greater. NRDBB will receive payment by way of dividend from and by ITI based on its 15% shareholding. Dividend is issued by ITI. ISTI will consider in the future whether it will re-invest any income or distribute dividends. The basis for calculation of profit within ISTI is not clear. Specific costs of forest management will include inventory, tree mapping, GIS, some monitoring costs. Current estimate is that this will amount to c. US$6.00 to 8.00. (Thus leaving "profit" of cUS$ 5.00 to US$7.00 [and thereby Fairview 9% as less than US$1.00]).

Note. Currently all timber is arising from the Fairview Titled Area. However in due course the same payment arrangements will apply into the future and Fairview/NRDBB will continue to receive financial benefit as operations proceed out of the Fariview titled area and across to the IIC controlled area. By way of illustration for the period Feb 07 to Aug 07 a total of 2217.05 cu.m was harvested. Stumpage value charge to TGI Royalty charge to TGI Total timber income to ITI Payment due to Fairview

Payment due to NRDBB Estimated total Community share of timber income US$4212.39. (13% of total to ITI). TGI TGI is responsible for all harvesting, conversion, transport and marketing, including costs of these operations. Conversion rates (round to sawn timber) is probably in the order of 40-50%. FOB value of sawn wood at Georgetown is in the order of US$550-600. Variable costs of production are probably about half this. Fixed (capital, finance and administrative costs) are additional costs. At 45% conversion the equivalent value of each cubic metre in the round is c.US$258. i.e. sales value sawn wood FOB Georgetown for 2217.05cu.m.roundwood converted to sawn would be US$571,366. Estimated community share of final value is therefore c 0.7%. Ratio of standing value to sawn timber sale value (31,780/571,366=) 5.5% TGI have produced a financial plan and cashflow projection, and in the first instance do not anticipate making a profit due to necessary investment. Future profits are anticipated Comparison to UK softwood Total consumption sawn softwood value 2005 1,221,000,000; Sawn softwood volume 9,998,000cu.m; average value /cum = 122. I.e. c. US$245/cu.m Average UK standing tree value at sawlog size 10.00 i.e. US$20.00. Ratio of standing value to sale value sawnwood c. 8%.

Issue Evaluation of community benefit being fair and made with free and informed consent is required under criteria 2.2 and 3.1.

This gives rise to the question is Iwokrama (ITI) deriving sufficient income from the timber business in order that it has in turn negotiated a sufficient share of income for onward remittance to the local community. There are no clear guidelines or criteria against which to make this judgement. Ultimately one could argue that the community themselves should be able to make this decision and that on the face of it they appear to have currently accepted the financial arrangements around the timber enterprise. Communities also appear to appreciate the wider economic benefits that accrue from working with Iwokrama. However the evaluation thus far by Woodmark is that there is not a good general understanding how financial costs/benefits of the timber operation are shared. A key question to peer reviewers and certification committee is therefore is it sufficient and appropriate to issue a CAR that requires Iwokrama to improve the level of information and understanding in relation to the finances of the timber operation OR do we need to make (on behalf of the community) a judgement as to whether community benefit is sufficient or not ? CARs 2007.5, 2007.11, 2007.25 and 2007.37 are designed to deal with this issue.

US$27,737.65 US $4,043.01 US$31,780.66 US$2,217.05 Unclear. If "profit" is US$6.00/cu.m. and NRDBB receive dividend of 15% this would give (6x2217.05) x .15 = US$1995.34

Woodmark Certification Decision Recommendation

Description of client / certificate holder Name: Code: # of sites: # of ha: Presence of HCVF: Presence of indigenous people: Summary of audit Type Names of auditors: Name of report reviewer: Report summary # of pre-conditions # of conditions # of recommendations Describe any potentially contentious issues.

Iwokrama Timber Incorporated SA-FM/COC-001805 Single 371,681 yes yes

S1 - CAR review Kevin Jones

All MAJOR CARs closed. 4 Minor CARs remain open 8 Recommendations Economic share of timber benefit to local community with free and infrmed consent Social and Env impact assessments Filed under: Forestry/Certification records

Location of report Recommendation I have reviewed the report of this assessment (including stakeholder consultation and peer review summary as appropriate) and Date: Approval Certification decision: Name: Signed: Date:

I recommend the certification decision for approval by SA Certification

20th Dec 2009

Approved Nicholas Underhay 20th Dec 2009

Woodmark South Plaza Marlborough Street Bristol BS1 3NX United Kingdom Telephone (+44) (0) 117 914 2435 Fax (+44) (0) 117 314 5001 Email wm@soilassocation.org www/soilassociation.org/forestry Soil Association Certification Ltd Company Registration No. 726903 A wholly-owned subsidiary of the Soil Association Charity No. 20686

Annex - List of pesticides prohibited in FSC certified forests and plantations unless a temporary derogation for use has previously been approved by the FSC Board of Directors. FSC Highly Hazardous List WHO Extremely hazardous (Class IA) technical grade active ingredients in pesticides Aldicarb Brodifacoum Bromadiolone Bromethalin Calcium cyanide Captafol Chlorethoxyfos Chlormephos Chlorophacinone Difenacoum Difethialone Diphacinone Disulfoton EPN Ethoprophos Flocoumafen Hexachlorobenzene Mercuric chloride Mevinphos Parathion Parathion-methyl Phenylmercury acetate Phorate Phosphamidon Sodium fluoroacetate Sulfotep WHO Highly hazardous (Class IB) technical grade active ingredients in pesticides Acrolein Allyl alcohol Azinphos-ethyl Azinphos-methyl Blasticidin-S Butocarboxim Butoxycarboxim Cadusafos Calcium arsenate Carbofuran Chlorfenvinphos 3-Chloro-1,2-propanediol Coumaphos Coumatetralyl Zeta-cypermethrin Demeton-S-methyl Dichlorvos Dicrotophos Dinoterb DNOC Edifenphos Ethiofencarb Famphur Fenamiphos Flucythrinate Fluoroacetamide

Aldicarb Aldrin Alpha-cypermethrin Aluminium phosphide Amitrole Atrazine Atropine, *Benomyl Brodifacoum Bromadiolone Carbaryl Carbosulfan Chlordane Chlorothalonil Chlorpyrifos Cyfluthrin Cypermethrin 2,4-D, 2-ethylhexyl ester *2-(2,4-DP), dma salt (= dichlorprop, dma salt) DDT Deltamethrin Diazinon *Dicamba, dma salt Dicofol Dieldrin Dienochlor Difethialone

Diflubenzuron Dimethoate Diquat dibromide Diuron Endosulfan Endrin Epoxiconazole Esfenvalerate Ethion Fenitrothion Fipronil Fluazifop-butyl Flufenoxuron Gamma-HCH, lindane Heptachlor Hexachlorobenzene Hexazinone *Hydramethylnon Isoxaben Lamba-cyhalothrin Mancozeb Metam sodium Methoxychlor Methylarsonic acid (monosodium methanearsenate, MSMA) Methylbromide Mirex *Naled Oryzalin Oxydemeton-methyl, Metasystox Oxyfluorfen Paraquat Parathion Pendimethalin Pentachlorophenol Permethrin Propaquizafop Propyzamide

Tebupirimfos Terbufos

Formetanate Furathiocarb Heptenophos Isoxathion Lead arsenate Mecarbam Mercuric oxide Methamidophos Methidathion Methiocarb Methomyl Monocrotophos Nicotine Omethoate Oxamyl Oxydemeton-methyl Paris green Pentachlorophenol Propetamphos Sodium arsenite Sodium cyanide Strychnine Tefluthrin Thallium sulfate Thiofanox Thiometon Triazophos Vamidothion Warfarin Zinc phosphide

Quintozene *Simazine Sodium cyanide Sodium fluoroacetate, 1080 Strychnine Sulfluramid 2,4,5-T Tebufenozide Terbumeton Terbuthylazine Terbutryn Thiodicarb Toxaphene (Camphechlor) Triadimenol Trifluralin Warfarin Zeta-cypermethrin Zinc phosphide