|
Thailand FORESTRY
An aerial photographic survey conducted in 1961 showed
forests to cover about 54 percent (or if swamp and scrub areas
are included, 56 percent) of Thailand. In the succeeding two
decades, this area was substantially reduced as a rapidly growing
population pushed into the forests seeking new land for
agricultural use. Increasing prices for certain upland crops,
especially in the 1970s, also acted as a strong incentive for
conversion of forests to cultivated lands. By the mid-1980s, the
expansion of the cultivated area had resulted in a decrease in
the amount of forestland to less than 30 percent.
Except for a few small, privately owned, coastal mangrove
areas, all forestland was the property of the state. Roughly 32
percent of the 1961 forest area, largely in the North and
Northeast, had been designated permanent reserved forest through
the end of the 1960s. Government plans called for additions in
subsequent years to raise the total to about 51 percent. Clearing
or cutting of timber or settling in such land was possible only
with an official permit. Many of the stream valleys in these
reserve areas, however, were highly suitable for agricultural
use. Traditionally, farmers had been able to occupy unreserved
public land on a free basis, restrictions in such cases relating
only to the cutting of certain timber tree species, which
remained the property of the state. As population growth
increased the demand for land, farmers in the 1970s also moved
into the reserved forests with little or no effective hindrance
from government agencies. This situation was generally
nonreversible, and observers anticipated that eventually most
such holdings suitable for cultivation would be legalized under
the agricultural land reform program.
Areas of forest usable for permanent cultivation still
existed in the early 1980s, mostly in the South. In other regions
there were logged-over areas and scrubland (at times included
with forestland), part of which could be used for agriculture.
Extant forest areas--minus potentially cultivable land--were
still considered sufficient to meet domestic timber and other
wood requirements and also to provide a surplus of forest
products for export. Foreign and Thai forestry specialists were
agreed that for this situation to continue, positive steps would
have to be taken, including an adequate program of reforestation,
prevention of illicit cutting and the use of steep forest slopes
for cultivation purposes, and active promotion of more efficient
forest exploitation practices. In the early 1970s, the Food and
Agriculture Organization recommended a reforestation program of 1
million hectares. The government later approved a plan to replant
120,000 hectares.
Major exploitation of the highly valuable teak wood for
exportation was begun by European interests in the late 1800s,
and by 1895 indiscriminate cutting had largely exhausted the more
easily workable stands. About this time, the government
established a system of control that included leases and cutting
cycles (a teak tree takes from 80 to 150 years to mature fully,
depending on local soils and weather). By 1909, when controls
were further tightened, almost all of the industry was in
European hands, mainly British but also Danish and French. During
World War II, a Thai company took over all concessions, and
although a few were returned to foreign control for a period
after the war, the government's long-term goal of full Thai
operation was attained in the late 1950s.
Although modern logging equipment was in widespread use,
difficult terrain and lack of roads in many areas necessitated
the use of elephants in logging operations. In 1982 there were
12,000 working elephants in Thailand, including those trained at
the Royal Forestry Department's Young Elephant Training Center.
The exploitation of Thailand's forests was the responsibility
of the Royal Forestry Department. Through the Forest Industry
Organization, a state-owned enterprise, the government controlled
nearly all extraction of mature teak. However, illegal felling of
teak continued to be a serious problem in the 1980s, although the
extent of the cutting was uncertain. A decade earlier, estimates
had placed illegal cutting at from one-third to an amount greater
than legal cutting. Some idea of the magnitude of the situation
was evident in a 1973 report of the Royal Forestry Department,
which cited some 7,600 incidents of illegal teak felling. The
department was not only unable to patrol adequately all forest
areas but authorities also failed to act against illegal logging
operations connected with politically influential individuals and
families.
Major damage to permanent forest areas also occurred,
especially in the 1970s and 1980s, through occupation of hillside
forestland that was not suitable for cultivation. This practice
was carried on throughout the country and resulted not only in
destruction of forests but also in erosion and damage to
watersheds. Notable forest destruction occurred over time in the
North because of shifting cultivation practiced mainly by the
hill peoples of the region. Of the roughly 70 percent of this
region classified as forests, well over a quarter was being used
for such cultivation in the late 1960s, according to a government
report. The amount grew tremendously during the 1970s as the
population of the hill peoples increased. In addition, many
landless Thai were reported to have migrated to the area, and
others who were farming agricultural land in the valleys also
were practicing shifting cultivation on the hills and
mountainsides to supplement production. According to some
sources, forested lands in the Northeast declined from about 60
percent in 1956 to less than 20 percent two decades later.
Although teak had been a major long-term source of foreign
exchange earnings, the output by volume of timber from other
commercially valuable species was far greater. Thailand had a
large number of such species, of which the most commonly exported
one was yang, related to the so-called Philippine
mahoganies. Others were of great value domestically, supplying
the country's general requirements for timber and wood products
of various sorts. In the 1980s, however, the forests failed to
meet the demand for raw materials for paper and paper products,
and these were being imported in growing quantities. Only limited
stands of pine existed, and development of a domestic pulp and
paper industry appeared to depend on the establishment of
suitable forest plantations.
Data as of September 1987
|
