From: Thinley Namgyel <tnamgyel@...>
Subject: Re: [Bhutan-eForest] new publication on biodiversity and climate change
To: Bhutan-eForest@yahoogroups.com
Date: Friday, November 6, 2009, 4:22 AM

 

Hi everyone Thanks Doley for starting this conversation. Im glad Ngawang is finding the sessions very illuminating. Also glad to hear Mr Phuntsho is still active in this forum and appreciates the information from Lobang.  I've been attending these climate change negotiations on and off as well. I was at the last session in Bangkok in October along with other people from Dept of Energy and Dept of Forests. To provide some insight to those interested, here goes. What Ngawang is attending is the 2nd part of the meeting that took place in Bangkok in October. Its 7th one so far in two years and is called the "semi finals" leading up to the 15th Conference of Parties to the UNFCCC scheduled to take place in Dec this year.  There has been now about 8 meetings over the last two years under what is called the "Bali Action Plan" (BAP) started in December 2007 to come up with a treaty to deal with climate change that also includes the US and other major developing countries to reduce global emissions of greenhouse gases.  Major issues under BAP are (1) Mitigation of Emission (2) Adaptation to the adverse impacts of climate change (3) technology transfer (4) Capacity building (5) Financing to enable 1,2,3&4. Reducing emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD) is included here as well. At the same time another parallel session is going on to negotiate new targets for the rich countries under the Kyoto Protocol for the period beyond 2012.  Both the BAP and Kyoto Protocol negotiations have a deadline of Dec 2009 to produce some agreement. Thats why there is such a big deal about COP15. Ngawang's suggestion for NEC to train everyone is noted. However, we have been providing relevant information and trying to involve all relevant stakeholders for a while now. I'm not sure how many national workshops, seminars and bilateral meetings, official briefs, media interviews,events, email exchanges we can conduct so that everyone is informed in the country.  We've also been inviting and finding support for relevant sectors to participate in these climate change meetings since 2002. That's how Ngawang is now attending the session in Barcelona, as did Lobzang and many others from the Forestry sector. We hope this is enough capacity building for the Forestry sector to make its assessments and recommendations regarding the ongoing negotiations on REDD and LULUCF.  The problem is we get a different person at every meeting from the forestry sector (a problem not restricted to DOF by the way). Unfortunately these are not adhoc workshops or occassional meetings, but continuous negotiations. These type of issues requires some continuity (and Commitment from the participants) to ensure our national interests. All the representatives of the sectors at these meetings always make this same recommendation in their official report which i assume gets filed away somewhere. Also despite official requests for some consistency, it's a different person at every session in the name of equity. Its also going to be mostly a new set of people going to the concluding negotiations in December this year at COP15.  So as we say in Bhutan, "What to do"  Best regards to everyone Thinley Namgyel NEC   Thinley Namgyel, Thimphu, Bhutan --- On Fri, 11/6/09, Nawang Gyeltshen <nawangfrdd@druknet. bt> wrote: From: Nawang Gyeltshen <nawangfrdd@druknet. bt> Subject: Re: {Disarmed} Re: {Disarmed} [Bhutan-eForest] new publication on biodiversity and climate change To: Bhutan-eForest@ yahoogroups. com Date: Friday, November 6, 2009, 3:27 PM   Sir, Thank you for the encouraging words. Indeed! the Talks are interesting and makes one wise in a week. Countries come prepared! Most are veterans. My first time participation' s recommendations to the NEC would be to educate Bhutanese mass and especially train the stakeholders beforehand. The issues being discussed are of utmost importance - globally and very much locally; preparations are therefore very very vital. Sir and other colleagues, I will post a detailed report later. For any issues relating Climate Change and Forestry, please feel free to contact me. I have many reports gathered including soft copies & web links. Regards from Barcelona, Sincerely, Ngawang Gyeltshen Senior Forestry Officer, Department of Forests BHUTAN On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 19:43:49 -0800 (PST) Phuntsho Namgyel <phuntshonamgyel2001 @yahoo.com> wrote: > Dear Nawang Gyeltshen, > > Thank you for the posting on climate change >negotiations. Hearing it first hand on what and how >issues are discussed in international politics is very >exciting.  > > This reminds me of my one recent long morning walk with >Lobzang, former Samtse DFO and now working with >Puna-tshangchu Hydopower Power Project. I enjoyed hearing >him say his experiences as a country representative in >the climate change talks; how long drawn these talks can >be, oftentimes carrying through the night, and sometimes >this tactic is deliberate by some countries and >organizers to make delegates weary, and to make accept >the draft. And also every single word is scrutinized in >the draft for overt and covert implications; and how >countries align themselves and do to protect their >national interests or extract gain or benefits. I also >remember him say that though the role of forests in >climate change is appreciated, however there is no >agreement as how to account the value and payment modes >for climate services by forestlands, therefore the new >method of REDD (Reduced Emissions ?, I can't remember the >full.). > > Reading news is one thing. Hearing first hand of the >details, and the thoughts and emotions behind the news is >quite another. I indeed enjoyed that morning walk with >Lobzang, and I thought how much knowledge and experience >Lobzang carried with him with regard to international >climate change talks, which if shared would make more >Bhutanese knowledgeable about an important international >topic.  > > Nawang, once again thank you for the posting. Please >continue to brief us about your very important assignment >in Barcelona. > > And also thank you Doley for forwarding the document on >biodiversity and climate change. I enjoyed browsing >through it and felt happy to be updated on the subject. > > Kind regards, > > Phuntsho Namgyel > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ >From: Nawang Gyeltshen <nawangfrdd@druknet. bt> > To: Bhutan-eForest@ yahoogroups. com > Sent: Thu, November 5, 2009 4:28:10 PM > Subject: Re: {Disarmed} [Bhutan-eForest] new publication >on biodiversity and climate change > >   > Dear all, > > Coincidentally, I attended the presentation of the same > paper today. I am at the Climate Change Talks in >Barcelona > and UN/FAO/UNEP presented these various papers as > side-events under REDD. > > The REDD discussions are going on pretty smooth in the > contact group with strong focus on conservation and > sustainable forest management through REDD+ (also little > focus on indigenous people and traditional knowledge as > demanded by few nations and NGOs). The final decisions > will depend on Copenhagen outcome as we are still >revising > negotiating text here, but I am pretty confident looking > at the discussions among the contact group. The REDD+ > will be a huge advantage for Bhutan including capacity > building, technology, financing etc. for our >conservation > & sfm efforts. I will update more on the outcomes >through > a detailed report after the sessions here. > > As for LULUCF under Kyoto, discussions started late for > Kyoto as developing nations demanded numbers on table. >It > resumed yesterday, and till today we are still listening > to Country scenarios on historical emissions and future > projections. However, things seem to be flowing. I will > update on it too. > > Regards from Barcelona, > > Ngawang Gyeltshen > Senior Forestry Officer, > Department of Forests > BHUTAN > > On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 23:46:43 -0800 (PST) > Doley <dtshering@yahoo. com> wrote: >> Dear all, >> >> Greetings from Bangkok! >> >> Attached is a report by one of the Technical Groups of >>the CBD (Convention on Biological Diversity) on >>biodiversity and climate chage. The report was produced >>to provide biodiversity- relevant information to the >>UNFCCC. It makes interesting reading and distills current >>thinking around CC and biodiversity. With CC talks at >>full swing at Barcelona and Copehagen around the corner, >>it makes it imperative that the NRM team impresses on >>negotiators on the need to factor BD into any global >>climate deal at Copehagen. Hope this helps you in your >>efforts to make the case too. >> >> Best regards, >> Doley >> >> >> >> -- >> This message has been scanned for viruses and >> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is >> believed to be clean. >> --Postmaster, DrukNet. >> > > ++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ >+++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++ > Advertise your tenders for free. Contact 326919 for more >information. > ++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ >+++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++ > > > > > > -- > This message has been scanned for viruses and > dangerous content by MailScanner, and is > believed to be clean. > --Postmaster, DrukNet. > ++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++ Advertise your tenders for free. Contact 326919 for more information. ++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++

From: Tashi Wangchuk <chentop73@...>
Subject: Re: [Bhutan-eForest] new publication on biodiversity and climate change
To: Bhutan-eForest@yahoogroups.com
Date: Saturday, November 7, 2009, 3:11 AM

Dear all,   I agree with Mr. TN from NEC. I came to know that many people from Bhutan has been representing at the global scene regarding climate change and REDD. From my opinion as a layman in CC and REDD, people who participate in such global conventions should disemminate when back home. They might have done but for last 15 years of my service in DoF i have never heard of such informations.   The matter is with the "Forest Governance" in Bhutan. Not a single people will talk good about DoF, be it rural farmer or civil servant. Even within the DoF some forester do not like community forests to be expanded or encouraged at large scale.   Regarding the CC and REDD, what does our new policy say about it? And again I agree with Au TN, right persons are not in right places.   I can see Mr. Ngawang is dynamic and his view on mass education is necessary. --- On Fri, 11/6/09, Thinley Namgyel <tnamgyel@...> wrote: From: Thinley Namgyel <tnamgyel@...> Subject: Re: [Bhutan-eForest] new publication on biodiversity and climate change To: Bhutan-eForest@yahoogroups.com Date: Friday, November 6, 2009, 4:22 AM   Hi everyone Thanks Doley for starting this conversation. Im glad Ngawang is finding the sessions very illuminating. Also glad to hear Mr Phuntsho is still active in this forum and appreciates the information from Lobang.  I've been attending these climate change negotiations on and off as well. I was at the last session in Bangkok in October along with other people from Dept of Energy and Dept of Forests. To provide some insight to those interested, here goes. What Ngawang is attending is the 2nd part of the meeting that took place in Bangkok in October. Its 7th one so far in two years and is called the "semi finals" leading up to the 15th Conference of Parties to the UNFCCC scheduled to take place in Dec this year.  There has been now about 8 meetings over the last two years under what is called the "Bali Action Plan" (BAP) started in December 2007 to come up with a treaty to deal with climate change that also includes the US and other major developing countries to reduce global emissions of greenhouse gases.  Major issues under BAP are (1) Mitigation of Emission (2) Adaptation to the adverse impacts of climate change (3) technology transfer (4) Capacity building (5) Financing to enable 1,2,3&4. Reducing emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD) is included here as well. At the same time another parallel session is going on to negotiate new targets for the rich countries under the Kyoto Protocol for the period beyond 2012.  Both the BAP and Kyoto Protocol negotiations have a deadline of Dec 2009 to produce some agreement. Thats why there is such a big deal about COP15. Ngawang's suggestion for NEC to train everyone is noted. However, we have been providing relevant information and trying to involve all relevant stakeholders for a while now. I'm not sure how many national workshops, seminars and bilateral meetings, official briefs, media interviews,events, email exchanges we can conduct so that everyone is informed in the country.  We've also been inviting and finding support for relevant sectors to participate in these climate change meetings since 2002. That's how Ngawang is now attending the session in Barcelona, as did Lobzang and many others from the Forestry sector. We hope this is enough capacity building for the Forestry sector to make its assessments and recommendations regarding the ongoing negotiations on REDD and LULUCF.  The problem is we get a different person at every meeting from the forestry sector (a problem not restricted to DOF by the way). Unfortunately these are not adhoc workshops or occassional meetings, but continuous negotiations. These type of issues requires some continuity (and Commitment from the participants) to ensure our national interests. All the representatives of the sectors at these meetings always make this same recommendation in their official report which i assume gets filed away somewhere. Also despite official requests for some consistency, it's a different person at every session in the name of equity. Its also going to be mostly a new set of people going to the concluding negotiations in December this year at COP15.  So as we say in Bhutan, "What to do"  Best regards to everyone Thinley Namgyel NEC   Thinley Namgyel, Thimphu, Bhutan --- On Fri, 11/6/09, Nawang Gyeltshen <nawangfrdd@druknet. bt> wrote: From: Nawang Gyeltshen <nawangfrdd@druknet. bt> Subject: Re: {Disarmed} Re: {Disarmed} [Bhutan-eForest] new publication on biodiversity and climate change To: Bhutan-eForest@ yahoogroups. com Date: Friday, November 6, 2009, 3:27 PM   Sir, Thank you for the encouraging words. Indeed! the Talks are interesting and makes one wise in a week. Countries come prepared! Most are veterans. My first time participation' s recommendations to the NEC would be to educate Bhutanese mass and especially train the stakeholders beforehand. The issues being discussed are of utmost importance - globally and very much locally; preparations are therefore very very vital. Sir and other colleagues, I will post a detailed report later. For any issues relating Climate Change and Forestry, please feel free to contact me. I have many reports gathered including soft copies & web links. Regards from Barcelona, Sincerely, Ngawang Gyeltshen Senior Forestry Officer, Department of Forests BHUTAN On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 19:43:49 -0800 (PST) Phuntsho Namgyel <phuntshonamgyel2001 @yahoo.com> wrote: > Dear Nawang Gyeltshen, > > Thank you for the posting on climate change >negotiations. Hearing it first hand on what and how >issues are discussed in international politics is very >exciting.  > > This reminds me of my one recent long morning walk with >Lobzang, former Samtse DFO and now working with >Puna-tshangchu Hydopower Power Project. I enjoyed hearing >him say his experiences as a country representative in >the climate change talks; how long drawn these talks can >be, oftentimes carrying through the night, and sometimes >this tactic is deliberate by some countries and >organizers to make delegates weary, and to make accept >the draft. And also every single word is scrutinized in >the draft for overt and covert implications; and how >countries align themselves and do to protect their >national interests or extract gain or benefits. I also >remember him say that though the role of forests in >climate change is appreciated, however there is no >agreement as how to account the value and payment modes >for climate services by forestlands, therefore the new >method of REDD (Reduced Emissions ?, I can't remember the >full.). > > Reading news is one thing. Hearing first hand of the >details, and the thoughts and emotions behind the news is >quite another. I indeed enjoyed that morning walk with >Lobzang, and I thought how much knowledge and experience >Lobzang carried with him with regard to international >climate change talks, which if shared would make more >Bhutanese knowledgeable about an important international >topic.  > > Nawang, once again thank you for the posting. Please >continue to brief us about your very important assignment >in Barcelona. > > And also thank you Doley for forwarding the document on >biodiversity and climate change. I enjoyed browsing >through it and felt happy to be updated on the subject. > > Kind regards, > > Phuntsho Namgyel > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ >From: Nawang Gyeltshen <nawangfrdd@druknet. bt> > To: Bhutan-eForest@ yahoogroups. com > Sent: Thu, November 5, 2009 4:28:10 PM > Subject: Re: {Disarmed} [Bhutan-eForest] new publication >on biodiversity and climate change > >   > Dear all, > > Coincidentally, I attended the presentation of the same > paper today. I am at the Climate Change Talks in >Barcelona > and UN/FAO/UNEP presented these various papers as > side-events under REDD. > > The REDD discussions are going on pretty smooth in the > contact group with strong focus on conservation and > sustainable forest management through REDD+ (also little > focus on indigenous people and traditional knowledge as > demanded by few nations and NGOs). The final decisions > will depend on Copenhagen outcome as we are still >revising > negotiating text here, but I am pretty confident looking > at the discussions among the contact group. The REDD+ > will be a huge advantage for Bhutan including capacity > building, technology, financing etc. for our >conservation > & sfm efforts. I will update more on the outcomes >through > a detailed report after the sessions here. > > As for LULUCF under Kyoto, discussions started late for > Kyoto as developing nations demanded numbers on table. >It > resumed yesterday, and till today we are still listening > to Country scenarios on historical emissions and future > projections. However, things seem to be flowing. I will > update on it too. > > Regards from Barcelona, > > Ngawang Gyeltshen > Senior Forestry Officer, > Department of Forests > BHUTAN > > On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 23:46:43 -0800 (PST) > Doley <dtshering@yahoo. com> wrote: >> Dear all, >> >> Greetings from Bangkok! >> >> Attached is a report by one of the Technical Groups of >>the CBD (Convention on Biological Diversity) on >>biodiversity and climate chage. The report was produced >>to provide biodiversity- relevant information to the >>UNFCCC. It makes interesting reading and distills current >>thinking around CC and biodiversity. With CC talks at >>full swing at Barcelona and Copehagen around the corner, >>it makes it imperative that the NRM team impresses on >>negotiators on the need to factor BD into any global >>climate deal at Copehagen. Hope this helps you in your >>efforts to make the case too. >> >> Best regards, >> Doley >> >> >> >> -- >> This message has been scanned for viruses and >> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is >> believed to be clean. >> --Postmaster, DrukNet. >> > > ++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ >+++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++ > Advertise your tenders for free. Contact 326919 for more >information. > ++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ >+++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++ > > > > > > -- > This message has been scanned for viruses and > dangerous content by MailScanner, and is > believed to be clean. > --Postmaster, DrukNet. > ++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++ Advertise your tenders for free. Contact 326919 for more information. ++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++

From: Ugen Norbu <upnorbu65@...>
Subject: Re: {Disarmed} Re: [Bhutan-eForest] new publication on biodiversity and climate change
To: Bhutan-eForest@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sunday, November 8, 2009, 9:38 PM

Dear all:

 

I absolutely agree with Thinlay Namgyel and Tashi Wangchuk's observations regarding the lack of consistency in our representation at various international fora esp those concerning the MEAs. As long as such meetings are considered as incentives for overseas travel and supplementary income, this trend is likely to continue. At this point, I would like to mention that the absence of Bhutanese participation at the regional/ sub-regional CC meeting held in Kathmandu a few months back in preparation for the Copenhagen COP15 was disappointing. Personally, I feel Bhutan may have a better chance in CC negotiations if we have solidarity with a group or region which share similar concerns and issues - so from that viewpoint participation in the Kathmandu CC meeting was important. I may be wrong in my observation but this is what I feel as an outsider (I mean someone who is outside the govt system).

 

Before I end my note, I would like to share with you this website: http://www.hopenhagen.org which is an on-line UN Climate Petition to be presented to the world leaders attending Copenhagen COP15. Please sign it - you will feel good about it.

 

Sincere regards,

 

Ugen P.

 

 

Norbu Samyul Consulting for Environment & Development
Post Box 391, Upper Changedaphu, Thimphu, Bhutan
Tel: 328 271; Fax: 337139; Cell: 17624930
E-mail: upnorbu65@...
LET'S LEAVE OUR CHILDREN A BEAUTIFUL WORLD

---

From: lobzang dorji <lobzangdoj@...>
To: Bhutan-eForest@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Mon, November 9, 2009 6:43:54 AM
Subject: Re: {Disarmed} Re: [Bhutan-eForest] new publication on biodiversity and climate change

 

Hi everyone,
I deliberately wanted to remain low profile and thanks to
NEC, especially Thinlay Namgay in supporting me to attend
many sessions and indeed i got the oppurtunity to share my
experinces with Phuntsho sir. I wish Nawang a good luck
and hope he will keep abreast of the scenerio not only by
the way of attending the seminars or sessions but on the
web too.
I am aware of the biodiversity negotiations in climate
change scenerio and i remember in Poznan we deliberated
for half and day and later releasize that we couldnot come
to a solid conclusion and some of the negiotiators were
just trying desperately to tone down REDD at large and
that is how we had to sticks to our earlier version of
sustainable forestry and conservationof primary forest. I
am not sure what transpire in Bangkok.
I am told that Nawang may not be leaving for Copenhagen
and in our department people think that it is one of trip
normally we are used to attend. I totally suppot Thinaly
namgay in his views, no matter at amount of aware craetion
with Dept of Forest, no one is going to take seroiusly. I
remember very cleary I wanted to present the papers in one
of hte seesions during our forestry meet but i was flatly
turn down and i nevertheless tried to share during our
normal so many meetings we are used to attending but there
too our so called expert in the forest come up with their
own versionof climate change version and international
scenario get lost and come and would not let me discuss
further too.
Nevertheless I have been on my on behalf sharing with any
organisations and recently i deliverd a lecture for half a
day with the Commando wing of RBA at Lobeysa and i am
thinking of being a adjunt lecturer on climate Change
(Environment) with College of Natural Resources if my boss
gives me permisssion. NEC, please donot think that your
resources have gone in the drain, I am doing my best.
All the best friends,
lobznag

rnsapire itoes of the COP negotiationsOn Fri, 6 Nov 2009
04:22:39 -0800 (PST)
Thinley Namgyel <tnamgyel@yahoo. com> wrote:
> Hi everyone
>
> Thanks Doley for starting this conversation.  Im glad
>Ngawang is finding the sessions very illuminating. Also
>glad to hear Mr Phuntsho is still active in this forum
>and appreciates the information from Lobang. 
> I've been attending these climate change negotiations on
>and off as well. I was at the last session in Bangkok in
>October along with other people from Dept of Energy and
>Dept of Forests. To provide some insight to those
>interested, here goes.
> What Ngawang is attending is the 2nd part of the meeting
>that took place in Bangkok in October. Its 7th one so far
>in two years and is called the "semi finals" leading up
>to the 15th Conference of Parties to the UNFCCC scheduled
>to take place in Dec this year. There has been now about
>8 meetings over the last two years under what is called
>the "Bali Action Plan" (BAP) started in December 2007 to
>come up with a treaty to deal with climate change that
>also includes the US and other major developing countries
>to reduce global emissions of greenhouse gases. Major
>issues under BAP are (1) Mitigation of Emission (2)
>Adaptation to the adverse impacts of climate change (3)
>technology transfer (4) Capacity building (5) Financing
>to enable 1,2,3&4. Reducing emissions from Deforestation
>and Degradation (REDD) is included here as well.At the
>same time another parallel session is going on to
>negotiate new targets for the rich countries under the
>Kyoto Protocol for
> the period beyond 2012. Both the BAP and Kyoto Protocol
>negotiations have a deadline of Dec 2009 to produce some
>agreement. Thats why there is such a big deal about
>COP15.
> Ngawang's suggestion for NEC to train everyone is noted.
>However, we have been providing relevant information and
>trying to involve all relevant stakeholders for a while
>now. I'm not sure how many national workshops, seminars
>and bilateral meetings, official briefs, media
>interviews, events, email exchanges we can conduct so that
>everyone is informed in the country. 
> We've also been inviting and finding support for
>relevant sectors to participate in these climate change
>meetings since 2002. That's how Ngawang is now attending
>the session in Barcelona, as did Lobzang and many others
>from the Forestry sector. We hope this is enough capacity
>building for the Forestry sector to make its assessments
>and recommendations regarding the ongoing negotiations on
>REDD and LULUCF. 
> The problem is we get a different person at every
>meeting from the forestry sector (a problem not
>restricted to DOF by the way). Unfortunately these are
>not adhoc workshops or occassional meetings, but
>continuous negotiations. These type of issues requires
>some continuity (and Commitment from the participants) to
>ensure our national interests. All the representatives of
>the sectors at these meetings always make this same
>recommendation in their official report which i assume
>gets filed away somewhere.
> Also despite official requests for some consistency,
>it's a different person at every session in the name of
>equity. Its also going to be mostly a new set of
>people going to the concluding negotiations in December
>this year at COP15. 
> So as we say in Bhutan, "What to do" 
> Best regards to everyone
> Thinley NamgyelNEC
>
>
>
>  
> Thinley Namgyel, Thimphu, Bhutan
>
>
>
> --- On Fri, 11/6/09, Nawang Gyeltshen
><nawangfrdd@druknet. bt> wrote:
>
>From: Nawang Gyeltshen <nawangfrdd@druknet. bt>
> Subject: Re: {Disarmed} Re: {Disarmed} [Bhutan-eForest]
>new publication on biodiversity and climate change
> To: Bhutan-eForest@ yahoogroups. com
> Date: Friday, November 6, 2009, 3:27 PM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Sir,
>
>
>
> Thank you for the encouraging words.
>
>
>
> Indeed! the Talks are interesting and makes one wise in
>a
>
> week. Countries come prepared! Most are veterans. My
>first
>
> time participation' s recommendations to the NEC would
>be
>
> to educate Bhutanese mass and especially train the
>
> stakeholders beforehand. The issues being discussed are
>of
>
> utmost importance - globally and very much locally;
>
> preparations are therefore very very vital.
>
>
>
> Sir and other colleagues, I will post a detailed report
>
> later. For any issues relating Climate Change and
>
>Forestry, please feel free to contact me. I have many
>
> reports gathered including soft copies & web links.
>
>
>
> Regards from Barcelona,
>
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
>
> Ngawang Gyeltshen
>
> Senior Forestry Officer,
>
> Department of Forests
>
> BHUTAN
>
>
>
> On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 19:43:49 -0800 (PST)
>
> Phuntsho Namgyel <phuntshonamgyel200 1 @yahoo.com>
>wrote:
>
>> Dear Nawang Gyeltshen,
>
>>
>
>> Thank you for the posting on climate change
>
>>negotiations. Hearing it first hand on what and how
>
>>issues are discussed in international politics is very
>
>>exciting. 
>
>>
>
>> This reminds me of my one recent long morning walk with
>
>>Lobzang, former Samtse DFO and now working with
>
>>Puna-tshangchu Hydopower Power Project. I enjoyed hearing
>
>>him say his experiences as a country representative in
>
>>the climate change talks; how long drawn these talks can
>
>>be, oftentimes carrying through the night, and sometimes
>
>>this tactic is deliberate by some countries and
>
>>organizers to make delegates weary, and to make accept
>
>>the draft. And also every single word is scrutinized in
>
>>the draft for overt and covert implications; and how
>
>>countries align themselves and do to protect their
>
>>national interests or extract gain or benefits. I also
>
>>remember him say that though the role of forests in
>
>>climate change is appreciated, however there is no
>
>>agreement as how to account the value and payment modes
>
>>for climate services by forestlands, therefore the new
>
>>method of REDD (Reduced Emissions ?, I can't remember the
>
>>full.).
>
>>
>
>> Reading news is one thing. Hearing first hand of the
>
>>details, and the thoughts and emotions behind the news is
>
>>quite another. I indeed enjoyed that morning walk with
>
>>Lobzang, and I thought how much knowledge and experience
>
>>Lobzang carried with him with regard to international
>
>>climate change talks, which if shared would make more
>
>>Bhutanese knowledgeable about an important international
>
>>topic. 
>
>>
>
>> Nawang, once again thank you for the posting. Please
>
>>continue to brief us about your very important assignment
>
>>in Barcelona.
>
>>
>
>> And also thank you Doley for forwarding the document on
>
>>biodiversity and climate change. I enjoyed browsing
>
>>through it and felt happy to be updated on the subject.
>
>>
>
>> Kind regards,
>
>>
>
>> Phuntsho Namgyel
>
>>
>
>>
>
>>
>
>> ____________ _________ _________ __
>
>>From: Nawang Gyeltshen <nawangfrdd@ druknet. bt>
>
>> To: Bhutan-eForest@ yahoogroups. com
>
>> Sent: Thu, November 5, 2009 4:28:10 PM
>
>> Subject: Re: {Disarmed} [Bhutan-eForest] new publication
>
>>on biodiversity and climate change
>
>>
>
>>  
>
>> Dear all,
>
>>
>
>> Coincidentally, I attended the presentation of the same
>
>> paper today. I am at the Climate Change Talks in
>
>>Barcelona
>
>> and UN/FAO/UNEP presented these various papers as
>
>> side-events under REDD.
>
>>
>
>> The REDD discussions are going on pretty smooth in the
>
>> contact group with strong focus on conservation and
>
>> sustainable forest management through REDD+ (also little
>
>> focus on indigenous people and traditional knowledge as
>
>> demanded by few nations and NGOs). The final decisions
>
>> will depend on Copenhagen outcome as we are still
>
>>revising
>
>> negotiating text here, but I am pretty confident looking
>
>> at the discussions among the contact group. The REDD+
>
>> will be a huge advantage for Bhutan including capacity
>
>> building, technology, financing etc. for our
>
>>conservation
>
>> & sfm efforts. I will update more on the outcomes
>
>>through
>
>> a detailed report after the sessions here.
>
>>
>
>> As for LULUCF under Kyoto, discussions started late for
>
>> Kyoto as developing nations demanded numbers on table.
>
>>It
>
>> resumed yesterday, and till today we are still listening
>
>> to Country scenarios on historical emissions and future
>
>> projections. However, things seem to be flowing. I will
>
>> update on it too.
>
>>
>
>> Regards from Barcelona,
>
>>
>
>> Ngawang Gyeltshen
>
>> Senior Forestry Officer,
>
>> Department of Forests
>
>> BHUTAN
>
>>
>
>> On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 23:46:43 -0800 (PST)
>
>> Doley <dtshering@yahoo. com> wrote:
>
>>> Dear all,
>
>>>
>
>>> Greetings from Bangkok!
>
>>>
>
>>> Attached is a report by one of the Technical Groups of
>
>>>the CBD (Convention on Biological Diversity) on
>
>>>biodiversity and climate chage. The report was produced
>
>>>to provide biodiversity- relevant information to the
>
>>>UNFCCC. It makes interesting reading and distills current
>
>>>thinking around CC and biodiversity. With CC talks at
>
>>>full swing at Barcelona and Copehagen around the corner,
>
>>>it makes it imperative that the NRM team impresses on
>
>>>negotiators on the need to factor BD into any global
>
>>>climate deal at Copehagen. Hope this helps you in your
>
>>>efforts to make the case too.
>
>>>
>
>>> Best regards,
>
>>> Doley
>
>>>
>
>>>
>
>>>
>
>>> --
>
>>> This message has been scanned for viruses and
>
>>> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
>
>>> believed to be clean.
>
>>> --Postmaster, DrukNet.
>
>>>
>
>>
>
>> ++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++
>
>>+++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++
>
>> Advertise your tenders for free. Contact 326919 for more
>
>>information.
>
>> ++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++
>
>>+++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++
>
>>
>
>>
>
>>
>
>>
>
>>
>
>> --
>
>> This message has been scanned for viruses and
>
>> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
>
>> believed to be clean.
>
>> --Postmaster, DrukNet.
>
>>
>
>
>
> ++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++
>+++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++
>
> Advertise your tenders for free. Contact 326919 for more
>information.
>
> ++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++
>+++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.
> --Postmaster, DrukNet.
>

Lobzang Dorji
Sr. Environment Officer
Punatsangchu Hydroelectric project
Lobeysa : Wangdue
Telephone 00975-2-376023
Cell -17606527/77606527

++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++
Advertise your tenders for free. Contact 326919 for more information.
++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++

From: purna chhetri <purnab_2000@...>
Subject: Re: {Disarmed} Re: [Bhutan-eForest] new publication on biodiversity and climate change
To: Bhutan-eForest@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sunday, November 8, 2009, 11:44 PM

 

Dear ALL The bottom line is we did not have basic research as well as strategic planning for climate change. what i would like to say is that we dont have basic research done, to connect environmental elements with humans and as mentioned already that we should have allied with natiomns with similar concerns and take a lead role there. I dont know how far it is true but our NEC people are always attending those conference of parties..what was they present? It would be nice to see thier papers.   Best regards Purna --- On Sun, 11/8/09, Ugen Norbu <upnorbu65@yahoo. com> wrote: From: Ugen Norbu <upnorbu65@yahoo. com> Subject: Re: {Disarmed} Re: [Bhutan-eForest] new publication on biodiversity and climate change To: Bhutan-eForest@ yahoogroups. com Date: Sunday, November 8, 2009, 9:38 PM Dear all:   I absolutely agree with Thinlay Namgyel and Tashi Wangchuk's observations regarding the lack of consistency in our representation at various international fora esp those concerning the MEAs. As long as such meetings are considered as incentives for overseas travel and supplementary income, this trend is likely to continue. At this point, I would like to mention that the absence of Bhutanese participation at the regional/ sub-regional CC meeting held in Kathmandu a few months back in preparation for the Copenhagen COP15 was disappointing. Personally, I feel Bhutan may have a better chance in CC negotiations if we have solidarity with a group or region which share similar concerns and issues - so from that viewpoint participation in the Kathmandu CC meeting was important. I may be wrong in my observation but this is what I feel as an outsider (I mean someone who is outside the govt system).   Before I end my note, I would like to share with you this website: http://www.hopenhag en.org which is an on-line UN Climate Petition to be presented to the world leaders attending Copenhagen COP15. Please sign it - you will feel good about it.   Sincere regards,   Ugen P.     Norbu Samyul Consulting for Environment & Development Post Box 391, Upper Changedaphu, Thimphu, Bhutan Tel: 328 271; Fax: 337139; Cell: 17624930 E-mail: upnorbu65@yahoo. com LET'S LEAVE OUR CHILDREN A BEAUTIFUL WORLD From: lobzang dorji <lobzangdoj@druknet. bt> To: Bhutan-eForest@ yahoogroups. com Sent: Mon, November 9, 2009 6:43:54 AM Subject: Re: {Disarmed} Re: [Bhutan-eForest] new publication on biodiversity and climate change   Hi everyone, I deliberately wanted to remain low profile and thanks to NEC, especially Thinlay Namgay in supporting me to attend many sessions and indeed i got the oppurtunity to share my experinces with Phuntsho sir. I wish Nawang a good luck and hope he will keep abreast of the scenerio not only by the way of attending the seminars or sessions but on the web too. I am aware of the biodiversity negotiations in climate change scenerio and i remember in Poznan we deliberated for half and day and later releasize that we couldnot come to a solid conclusion and some of the negiotiators were just trying desperately to tone down REDD at large and that is how we had to sticks to our earlier version of sustainable forestry and conservationof primary forest. I am not sure what transpire in Bangkok. I am told that Nawang may not be leaving for Copenhagen and in our department people think that it is one of trip normally we are used to attend. I totally suppot Thinaly namgay in his views, no matter at amount of aware craetion with Dept of Forest, no one is going to take seroiusly. I remember very cleary I wanted to present the papers in one of hte seesions during our forestry meet but i was flatly turn down and i nevertheless tried to share during our normal so many meetings we are used to attending but there too our so called expert in the forest come up with their own versionof climate change version and international scenario get lost and come and would not let me discuss further too. Nevertheless I have been on my on behalf sharing with any organisations and recently i deliverd a lecture for half a day with the Commando wing of RBA at Lobeysa and i am thinking of being a adjunt lecturer on climate Change (Environment) with College of Natural Resources if my boss gives me permisssion. NEC, please donot think that your resources have gone in the drain, I am doing my best. All the best friends, lobznag rnsapire itoes of the COP negotiationsOn Fri, 6 Nov 2009 04:22:39 -0800 (PST) Thinley Namgyel <tnamgyel@yahoo. com> wrote: > Hi everyone > > Thanks Doley for starting this conversation.  Im glad >Ngawang is finding the sessions very illuminating. Also >glad to hear Mr Phuntsho is still active in this forum >and appreciates the information from Lobang.  > I've been attending these climate change negotiations on >and off as well. I was at the last session in Bangkok in >October along with other people from Dept of Energy and >Dept of Forests. To provide some insight to those >interested, here goes. > What Ngawang is attending is the 2nd part of the meeting >that took place in Bangkok in October. Its 7th one so far >in two years and is called the "semi finals" leading up >to the 15th Conference of Parties to the UNFCCC scheduled >to take place in Dec this year. There has been now about >8 meetings over the last two years under what is called >the "Bali Action Plan" (BAP) started in December 2007 to >come up with a treaty to deal with climate change that >also includes the US and other major developing countries >to reduce global emissions of greenhouse gases. Major >issues under BAP are (1) Mitigation of Emission (2) >Adaptation to the adverse impacts of climate change (3) >technology transfer (4) Capacity building (5) Financing >to enable 1,2,3&4. Reducing emissions from Deforestation >and Degradation (REDD) is included here as well.At the >same time another parallel session is going on to >negotiate new targets for the rich countries under the >Kyoto Protocol for > the period beyond 2012. Both the BAP and Kyoto Protocol >negotiations have a deadline of Dec 2009 to produce some >agreement. Thats why there is such a big deal about >COP15. > Ngawang's suggestion for NEC to train everyone is noted. >However, we have been providing relevant information and >trying to involve all relevant stakeholders for a while >now. I'm not sure how many national workshops, seminars >and bilateral meetings, official briefs, media >interviews, events, email exchanges we can conduct so that >everyone is informed in the country.  > We've also been inviting and finding support for >relevant sectors to participate in these climate change >meetings since 2002. That's how Ngawang is now attending >the session in Barcelona, as did Lobzang and many others >from the Forestry sector. We hope this is enough capacity >building for the Forestry sector to make its assessments >and recommendations regarding the ongoing negotiations on >REDD and LULUCF.  > The problem is we get a different person at every >meeting from the forestry sector (a problem not >restricted to DOF by the way). Unfortunately these are >not adhoc workshops or occassional meetings, but >continuous negotiations. These type of issues requires >some continuity (and Commitment from the participants) to >ensure our national interests. All the representatives of >the sectors at these meetings always make this same >recommendation in their official report which i assume >gets filed away somewhere. > Also despite official requests for some consistency, >it's a different person at every session in the name of >equity. Its also going to be mostly a new set of >people going to the concluding negotiations in December >this year at COP15.  > So as we say in Bhutan, "What to do"  > Best regards to everyone > Thinley NamgyelNEC > > > >   > Thinley Namgyel, Thimphu, Bhutan > > > > --- On Fri, 11/6/09, Nawang Gyeltshen ><nawangfrdd@druknet. bt> wrote: > >From: Nawang Gyeltshen <nawangfrdd@druknet. bt> > Subject: Re: {Disarmed} Re: {Disarmed} [Bhutan-eForest] >new publication on biodiversity and climate change > To: Bhutan-eForest@ yahoogroups. com > Date: Friday, November 6, 2009, 3:27 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >   > > > > > > > > > > Sir, > > > > Thank you for the encouraging words. > > > > Indeed! the Talks are interesting and makes one wise in >a > > week. Countries come prepared! Most are veterans. My >first > > time participation' s recommendations to the NEC would >be > > to educate Bhutanese mass and especially train the > > stakeholders beforehand. The issues being discussed are >of > > utmost importance - globally and very much locally; > > preparations are therefore very very vital. > > > > Sir and other colleagues, I will post a detailed report > > later. For any issues relating Climate Change and > >Forestry, please feel free to contact me. I have many > > reports gathered including soft copies & web links. > > > > Regards from Barcelona, > > > > Sincerely, > > > > Ngawang Gyeltshen > > Senior Forestry Officer, > > Department of Forests > > BHUTAN > > > > On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 19:43:49 -0800 (PST) > > Phuntsho Namgyel <phuntshonamgyel200 1 @yahoo.com> >wrote: > >> Dear Nawang Gyeltshen, > >> > >> Thank you for the posting on climate change > >>negotiations. Hearing it first hand on what and how > >>issues are discussed in international politics is very > >>exciting.  > >> > >> This reminds me of my one recent long morning walk with > >>Lobzang, former Samtse DFO and now working with > >>Puna-tshangchu Hydopower Power Project. I enjoyed hearing > >>him say his experiences as a country representative in > >>the climate change talks; how long drawn these talks can > >>be, oftentimes carrying through the night, and sometimes > >>this tactic is deliberate by some countries and > >>organizers to make delegates weary, and to make accept > >>the draft. And also every single word is scrutinized in > >>the draft for overt and covert implications; and how > >>countries align themselves and do to protect their > >>national interests or extract gain or benefits. I also > >>remember him say that though the role of forests in > >>climate change is appreciated, however there is no > >>agreement as how to account the value and payment modes > >>for climate services by forestlands, therefore the new > >>method of REDD (Reduced Emissions ?, I can't remember the > >>full.). > >> > >> Reading news is one thing. Hearing first hand of the > >>details, and the thoughts and emotions behind the news is > >>quite another. I indeed enjoyed that morning walk with > >>Lobzang, and I thought how much knowledge and experience > >>Lobzang carried with him with regard to international > >>climate change talks, which if shared would make more > >>Bhutanese knowledgeable about an important international > >>topic.  > >> > >> Nawang, once again thank you for the posting. Please > >>continue to brief us about your very important assignment > >>in Barcelona. > >> > >> And also thank you Doley for forwarding the document on > >>biodiversity and climate change. I enjoyed browsing > >>through it and felt happy to be updated on the subject. > >> > >> Kind regards, > >> > >> Phuntsho Namgyel > >> > >> > >> > >> ____________ _________ _________ __ > >>From: Nawang Gyeltshen <nawangfrdd@ druknet. bt> > >> To: Bhutan-eForest@ yahoogroups. com > >> Sent: Thu, November 5, 2009 4:28:10 PM > >> Subject: Re: {Disarmed} [Bhutan-eForest] new publication > >>on biodiversity and climate change > >> > >>   > >> Dear all, > >> > >> Coincidentally, I attended the presentation of the same > >> paper today. I am at the Climate Change Talks in > >>Barcelona > >> and UN/FAO/UNEP presented these various papers as > >> side-events under REDD. > >> > >> The REDD discussions are going on pretty smooth in the > >> contact group with strong focus on conservation and > >> sustainable forest management through REDD+ (also little > >> focus on indigenous people and traditional knowledge as > >> demanded by few nations and NGOs). The final decisions > >> will depend on Copenhagen outcome as we are still > >>revising > >> negotiating text here, but I am pretty confident looking > >> at the discussions among the contact group. The REDD+ > >> will be a huge advantage for Bhutan including capacity > >> building, technology, financing etc. for our > >>conservation > >> & sfm efforts. I will update more on the outcomes > >>through > >> a detailed report after the sessions here. > >> > >> As for LULUCF under Kyoto, discussions started late for > >> Kyoto as developing nations demanded numbers on table. > >>It > >> resumed yesterday, and till today we are still listening > >> to Country scenarios on historical emissions and future > >> projections. However, things seem to be flowing. I will > >> update on it too. > >> > >> Regards from Barcelona, > >> > >> Ngawang Gyeltshen > >> Senior Forestry Officer, > >> Department of Forests > >> BHUTAN > >> > >> On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 23:46:43 -0800 (PST) > >> Doley <dtshering@yahoo. com> wrote: > >>> Dear all, > >>> > >>> Greetings from Bangkok! > >>> > >>> Attached is a report by one of the Technical Groups of > >>>the CBD (Convention on Biological Diversity) on > >>>biodiversity and climate chage. The report was produced > >>>to provide biodiversity- relevant information to the > >>>UNFCCC. It makes interesting reading and distills current > >>>thinking around CC and biodiversity. With CC talks at > >>>full swing at Barcelona and Copehagen around the corner, > >>>it makes it imperative that the NRM team impresses on > >>>negotiators on the need to factor BD into any global > >>>climate deal at Copehagen. Hope this helps you in your > >>>efforts to make the case too. > >>> > >>> Best regards, > >>> Doley > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> This message has been scanned for viruses and > >>> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is > >>> believed to be clean. > >>> --Postmaster, DrukNet. > >>> > >> > >> ++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ > >>+++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++ > >> Advertise your tenders for free. Contact 326919 for more > >>information. > >> ++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ > >>+++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++ > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> This message has been scanned for viruses and > >> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is > >> believed to be clean. > >> --Postmaster, DrukNet. > >> > > > > ++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ >+++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++ > > Advertise your tenders for free. Contact 326919 for more >information. > > ++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ >+++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > This message has been scanned for viruses and > dangerous content by MailScanner, and is > believed to be clean. > --Postmaster, DrukNet. > Lobzang Dorji Sr. Environment Officer Punatsangchu Hydroelectric project Lobeysa : Wangdue Telephone 00975-2-376023 Cell -17606527/77606527 ++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++ Advertise your tenders for free. Contact 326919 for more information. ++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++

From: Nawang Gyeltshen <nawangfrdd@...>
Subject: Re: [Bhutan-eForest] new publication on biodiversity and climate change
To: Bhutan-eForest@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, November 9, 2009, 1:36 AM

 

Hello everyone,

Well, the discussions are going far beyond my intention at
the least :). And a sense of guilt forces me to write
this.

TN Sir, I do not disagree with you on any point, rather
its matter of fact everyone knows of the issues you raised
on. As you rightly put it ‘what to do?’ My recommendation
was that NEC should train the participants through a
workshop for a day or two for the negotiations especially
now for Copenhagen involving all previous participants.
All what you mentioned is, but a bitter truth like climate
change itself. But leaving all those apart, this time a
training or discussions among participants is a must,
since it involves negotiations on some key areas
concerning Bhutan especially for other sectors while NEC
team is very fluent. We are confident NEC team will fare
well in most areas but with so many parallel sessions are
on, I am little worried few issues might be left out due
to number of sessions vs. members (my personal assumption
though). Sir, We blame each other- each time, yet we
always send paper reminders which we know hardly works in
our context. Over the past few weeks I was tired of
begging members for meetings for an important issue, to
cite as an example. But I totally agree on all what you
mentioned.

The inconsistency of participants actually came to me as a
blessing in disguise and I too will not let it go in vain.
Within FAO (which I look after in DOF), we have a mini
project to prepare climate change action plan for
sustainable forest management and through this experience
I can now facilitate well probably with Watershed
division. Also, personally I am trying for a UNEP
scholarship in climate change and biodiversity and this
time my proposal would turn up stronger. And as Lobzang
sir rightly agreed, indeed capacity building! All thanks
to NEC and MOA.
However, If we see the brighter side of inconsistency of
participants, we have an advantage especially in our
context when relevant people get posted elsewhere now and
then. I remember how Lobzang Sir tried each time to raise
pertinent issues on CC every meeting I attended, and
hardly people would lend their ears. Also our fellow
colleague representing Bangkok talks personally advised me
and we had discussions on the need to bring on the issues
to larger forum. So I would reassure you that positive
things are on a side of a coin too. But as everyone agrees
in here, sharing of information & wooing people’s interest
is a modality we should adopt.

Tashi, issues like CC and REDD are hot topics in forestry
today, but as TN sir mentions these negotiations are
different. My personal perception on forest governance as
you view it, we have improved a lot and the new policy
directions are clear and holistic but it demands
foresters’ commitment and dedication. Community forestry
is a noble concept, everyone agrees; but the success
should NOT be determined by numbers & areas BUT by the
objectives it meets. That is very important for us to
understand. Let us take some time to test the inventory,
feasibility, silviculture & sustainability etc. and gain
confidence in our local context before instructing our
field staffs to deliver number of CFs to assess their
progress. Let us debate, discuss, and disagree to agree
for we are talking of sustainability of our forests. Yes!
in future, CF is what we will try to gear towards as it
involves our communities. As for the inclusion of issues
like REDD in the new Policy, we did discuss but these are
not formalized mechanisms till Copehagen (also some other
issues might come out in Copnehagen). Therefore we have
mentioned a broad policy goal of contributing to issues of
CC and carbon sequestration especially through sustainable
forest management so that policy leaves directives for any
issues under CC.

PB sir, nice to hear your critics as well. Yes, we have no
allometrics developed for our species but it lies in our
hands to develop those. How long will we depend on
Consultants? We therefore urge all concerned to cooperate
with ideas for our proposed national forest inventory.
These are some of the results we might seek. Yes we do not
have basic research and we need local research, but as for
now SCIENCE is clear on climate change and we need to
react. As ecologists (you and me) let us fathom the
ecological impacts on our forests due to CC… :P

PS. Clarifications on some cum thought provoking critics.
There is no room for improvement without criticisms.

Sincere regards,

Ngawang Gyletshen
Senior Forestry Oficer
Department of Forests

++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++
Advertise your tenders for free. Contact 326919 for more information.
++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++

From: Nawang Gyeltshen <nawangfrdd@...>
Subject: Re: [Bhutan-eForest] new publication on biodiversity and climate change
To: Bhutan-eForest@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, November 9, 2009, 4:24 AM

 

Dear Tashi,

Very pertinent points, few clarifications and advices;

1. Bhutan cannot treat Nepal as model for CF which many
policy makers does. Yes we can take some vital lessons.
But unlike some countries where CF is virtually only
possible forestry practices (because of historical
deforestation) , we have rich intact forest to explore all
avenues - conservation, production, CF, PF, wood based
industries, CC...and the list goes on. Lets follow the new
policy goals which are holistic in this case.

2. Sustainable forest management has pillars (ecological,
social & economical). CF is also a form of sustainable
forest management. SFM is not confined to FMUs as most of
us see it.

3. I am not saying we are not confident in our
communities. But ask ourselves! where are we when we talk
of sustainable forest management despite being the oldest
department? My point is we have to disseminate principles
of forestry. So by saying we are not confident I mean we
are not confident in ourselves to be confident in local
communities cos they depend on our science.

But I agree and like your ideas. Keep posting :)

Cheers!

Ngawang Gyeltshen
Senior Forestry Officer,
Department of Forests

On Mon, 9 Nov 2009 02:52:33 -0800 (PST)
Tashi Wangchuk <chentop73@yahoo. com> wrote:
> Hi Ngawang,
>  
> Nice to read your wisdom on boring Monday evening here
>in Bnagkok. If you try for UNEP, we have highly qualified
>Bhutanese working there. Not only in UNEP but also in
>UNDP and FAO.
>  
> I want to link CF with CC where we have huge potentials.
>I also joined e-discussion organized by ICIMOD last month
>and we do have good example, facts and figure regarding
>the CC and gender esp. women) from Nepal and other
>countries. Though gender is not a big issue in Bhutan,
>but gender is one of the focus of CF. CF is all about
>forest governance. Then the governance can be divided
>into components and principles. Where components are of
>Laws, Institutions and Processes. When we talk about the
>principles there are many. Few examples relevent to CF in
>Bhutan are the Accountability, Transparency,
>Participation and then the Rule of Law. Our new forest
>policy, FNCA and FNCR comes as components. Relate those
>living documents with those principles. Putting myself in
>a farmer's shoe I still feel decentralization as
>centralized esp. in the districts with regard to CF
>establishment. CF can enhance sustainability, these
>sustainability is not only on forest
> management sustainability but talks about social
>sustainability, economic sustainability, environmental
>sustainability, etc. I agree with you that we should
>assess the progress in terms of number and areas. The
>sustainability cannot be assessed soon after handing over
>of the CF due to the nature of long gestation periods in
>natural resources. If we (DoF) still feel unconfident in
>our rural people and field staff, then when and who will
>feel it? Here comes the governance component of
>Institution! folowed by its principle of Rule of Law. 
>  
> Anyway its a good discussion on CF but can directly or
>indirectly lead to CC.
>  
> Regards
>
> --- On Mon, 11/9/09, Nawang Gyeltshen
><nawangfrdd@druknet. bt> wrote:
>
>
>From: Nawang Gyeltshen <nawangfrdd@druknet. bt>
> Subject: Re: [Bhutan-eForest] new publication on
>biodiversity and climate change
> To: Bhutan-eForest@ yahoogroups. com
> Date: Monday, November 9, 2009, 1:36 AM
>
>
>  
>
>
>
> Hello everyone,
>
> Well, the discussions are going far beyond my intention
>at
> the least :). And a sense of guilt forces me to write
> this.
>
> TN Sir, I do not disagree with you on any point, rather
> its matter of fact everyone knows of the issues you
>raised
> on. As you rightly put it ‘what to do?’ My
>recommendation
> was that NEC should train the participants through a
> workshop for a day or two for the negotiations
>especially
> now for Copenhagen involving all previous participants.
> All what you mentioned is, but a bitter truth like
>climate
> change itself. But leaving all those apart, this time a
> training or discussions among participants is a must,
> since it involves negotiations on some key areas
> concerning Bhutan especially for other sectors while NEC
> team is very fluent. We are confident NEC team will fare
> well in most areas but with so many parallel sessions
>are
> on, I am little worried few issues might be left out due
> to number of sessions vs. members (my personal
>assumption
> though). Sir, We blame each other- each time, yet we
> always send paper reminders which we know hardly works
>in
> our context. Over the past few weeks I was tired of
> begging members for meetings for an important issue, to
> cite as an example. But I totally agree on all what you
> mentioned.
>
> The inconsistency of participants actually came to me as
>a
> blessing in disguise and I too will not let it go in
>vain.
> Within FAO (which I look after in DOF), we have a mini
> project to prepare climate change action plan for
> sustainable forest management and through this
>experience
> I can now facilitate well probably with Watershed
> division. Also, personally I am trying for a UNEP
> scholarship in climate change and biodiversity and this
> time my proposal would turn up stronger. And as Lobzang
> sir rightly agreed, indeed capacity building! All thanks
> to NEC and MOA.
> However, If we see the brighter side of inconsistency of
> participants, we have an advantage especially in our
> context when relevant people get posted elsewhere now
>and
> then. I remember how Lobzang Sir tried each time to
>raise
> pertinent issues on CC every meeting I attended, and
> hardly people would lend their ears. Also our fellow
> colleague representing Bangkok talks personally advised
>me
> and we had discussions on the need to bring on the
>issues
> to larger forum. So I would reassure you that positive
> things are on a side of a coin too. But as everyone
>agrees
> in here, sharing of information & wooing people’s
>interest
> is a modality we should adopt.
>
> Tashi, issues like CC and REDD are hot topics in
>forestry
> today, but as TN sir mentions these negotiations are
> different. My personal perception on forest governance
>as
> you view it, we have improved a lot and the new policy
> directions are clear and holistic but it demands
> foresters’ commitment and dedication. Community forestry
> is a noble concept, everyone agrees; but the success
> should NOT be determined by numbers & areas BUT by the
> objectives it meets. That is very important for us to
> understand. Let us take some time to test the inventory,
> feasibility, silviculture & sustainability etc. and gain
> confidence in our local context before instructing our
> field staffs to deliver number of CFs to assess their
> progress. Let us debate, discuss, and disagree to agree
> for we are talking of sustainability of our forests.
>Yes!
> in future, CF is what we will try to gear towards as it
> involves our communities. As for the inclusion of issues
> like REDD in the new Policy, we did discuss but these
>are
> not formalized mechanisms till Copehagen (also some
>other
> issues might come out in Copnehagen). Therefore we have
> mentioned a broad policy goal of contributing to issues
>of
> CC and carbon sequestration especially through
>sustainable
> forest management so that policy leaves directives for
>any
> issues under CC.
>
> PB sir, nice to hear your critics as well. Yes, we have
>no
> allometrics developed for our species but it lies in our
> hands to develop those. How long will we depend on
> Consultants? We therefore urge all concerned to
>cooperate
> with ideas for our proposed national forest inventory.
> These are some of the results we might seek. Yes we do
>not
> have basic research and we need local research, but as
>for
> now SCIENCE is clear on climate change and we need to
> react. As ecologists (you and me) let us fathom the
> ecological impacts on our forests due to CC… :P
>
> PS. Clarifications on some cum thought provoking
>critics.
> There is no room for improvement without criticisms.
>
> Sincere regards,
>
> Ngawang Gyletshen
> Senior Forestry Oficer
> Department of Forests
>
> ++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++
>+++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++
> Advertise your tenders for free. Contact 326919 for more
>information.
> ++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++
>+++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.
> --Postmaster, DrukNet.
>

++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++
Advertise your tenders for free. Contact 326919 for more information.
++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++

From: Nawang Gyeltshen <nawangfrdd@...>
Subject: [Bhutan-eForest] Integrated approach to Environment Conservation and Natural Resources management in Bhutan [1 Attachment]
To: Bhutan-eForest@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, November 9, 2009, 2:22 PM

 

Dear colleagues,

Reading few of the earlier comments brings me to one
important issue on the need to focus on integrated
approach particularly on issues concerning wider scopes.
It is known fact to everyone that we are under surfeit of
Acts & legislation in the country, yet practical
implementations and objectives do not find its intended
way in most cases. More so, whenever a new Act is drafted,
it always supersedes former related Acts thereby making
many important Acts trivial.

Recognizing the same, in the process of drafting the new
Forest Act; we personally went to relevant stakeholders
and discussed openly with frank feedbacks and open
criticisms. We conveyed the message of overlaps and the
need to harmonize & coordinate; all were welcoming and
very helpful; unlike meetings where we hit on each other
on gorge our anger on phaksha paa. Sad that NLC had no
time to entertain us despite hundreds of call-requests but
we will revisit them.

We therefore propose coordination of all relevant
legislation particularly concerning Environment and
Natural Resources Management. If need be and a single act
becomes too cumbersome and takes longer to develop, we
propose creating separate, but tightly coordinated and
cross-referenced legislation.

As a result of our preliminary discussions on Forest Act
revision, we propose the following framework; where we
treat Land Act and National Environment Protection Act as
some kind of umbrella Acts. Please comment on this that we
can further develop and redevelop. The National Forest
Policy is expected to be formally approved in December,
and by then we would have considerable progress on the
Forest Act too. I am attaching a draft framework for your
valuable comments.

Looking forward to hear your valuable comments.

Sincere regards,

Ngawang Gyeltshen
Senior Forestry Officer
Department of Forests
++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++
Advertise your tenders for free. Contact 326919 for more information.
++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++

From: Tashi Wangchuk <chentop@...>
Subject: Fwd: Low cost Soil and Water Conservation Techniques and Watershed Management Activities-2010
To: chentop73@...
Date: Tuesday, November 10, 2009, 6:30 PM

Tashi Wangchuk
M.Sc.Student (ID No. 5214300571)
International Program on Tropical Forestry
Faculty of Forestry, Kasetsart University
Bangkok, Thailand
+ 66 868822370 (Cell)


  --- the forwarded message follows ---
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Advertise your tenders for free. Contact 326919 for more information.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From: Nawang Gyeltshen <nawangfrdd@...>
Subject: Re: {Disarmed} Re: {Disarmed} [Bhutan-eForest] PES, Conservation and sustainability: A Model
To: Bhutan-eForest@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, November 11, 2009, 6:57 AM

 

Dear PB sir,

I very much understand what you intend to speak on, cos
these have been the voices of foresters for years.
Unfortunately we always talk on plough-back mechanisms and
mostly try to equate with cash. Why should we? The
hydrpower revenue is already going to national
finance....and they are paying royalty.

My idea of plough-back mechanism is...when you have mega
projects in an area, leave something for the nature &
community since the community have conserved and depended
on the natural resources there, and by our intervention it
is disturbing their natural ecosystem. Let any one do
it...hydropower projects, NRDCL, or any one...most
recommended in an integrated approach by involving our
technical expertise! I don't believe we should get cash
from project beneficiaries in the name of plough-back. The
plough-back incentive should go to communities
directly...We are getting paid for doing our job, so does
everyone...

For example, when NRDCL operates in an area; all we are
asking is leave something for the nature...plant trees,
improve the forest !!! leave something for
communities. ..build a bridge, construct a better local
water supply etc. That to me, is a true PLOUGH-BACK.

Yes Sir, It is indeed a big big task - I agree. I am going
back from my funded trip to serve, why don't you leave
your funded studies too and join me? MOA needs
us...hehehehe.
On personal note, as always I enjoy reading your arguments
and cannot help myself provoke you to hear more!!!

Regards,

Ngawang Gyeltshen
Senior Forestry Officer,
Department of Forests.

On Tue, 10 Nov 2009 02:24:22 -0800 (PST)
purna chhetri <purnab_2000@ yahoo.com> wrote:
> Dear Ngawang
> Thanks for teh quick response. Well, as you have pointed
>that my point are / were discussed, well it is not the
>first time, when we started working in Gamrichu watershed
>planning we talk about so called plogh back mechanism
>with hydro people. But this doesnot work, we need to set
>up insurance to distribute the benefits, it will be not
>business usual. We need to tax and put the tax in
>insurance, accumulate the capital there and use it
>sustainbly.
> It is big task but we can start working on that model.If
>things has to be done in different ways in sutainable
>manner. But if you just enjoy going around with FAO
>funding and stop middle of nowhere..that is business
>usual
>
> Best regards
> Purna
>
> --- On Tue, 11/10/09, Nawang Gyeltshen
><nawangfrdd@druknet. bt> wrote:
>
>> From: Nawang Gyeltshen <nawangfrdd@druknet. bt>
>> Subject: Re: {Disarmed} [Bhutan-eForest] PES,
>>Conservation and sustainability: A Model
>> To: Bhutan-eForest@ yahoogroups. com
>> Date: Tuesday, November 10, 2009, 12:31 AM
>> Dear PB Sir,
>>
>> Congratulations on your new post in Vienna, you made us
>> proud. First things first, discuss on the visa issue and
>> sort that out. It seems its just a lame pretext
>>everytime.
>>
>> For Tashi Samdrup, he studied in Europe and needed no
>> authentication of certificates yet he was late too. Sort
>> that out. We tried all means from our side. And with
>> Dr.georg, try getting more Bhutanese there. You are
>> therefore contributing to capacity building and then
>>your
>> model will be realistic... haha.
>>
>> On serious note, PES is a hot topic today in Bhutan and
>>we
>>
>> already discussed most of your points. Hydropower pasy
>> some 1% royalty for that...but we discussed on the need
>> for other means thereby contributing to our watershed
>> management. From the Policy we derived so many
>>subsidiary
>> documents for its effective implementation (job insured
>> for Bhutanese foresters retiring soon). Please refer to
>> Resolutions of Foresrty Conference, which is half the
>>list
>>
>> we came out with nevertheless. ..
>>
>> Your ideas as always are wise and good to listen. I will
>> share that in a meeting with Watershed Division some
>>time.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Ngawang Gyeltshen
>> Senior Forestry Officer,
>> Department of Forests
>>
>> On Mon, 9 Nov 2009 20:47:14 -0800 (PST)
>>   purna chhetri <purnab_2000@ yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Dear All
>> > While,  when good debate is going on let me break an
>> ice
>> >with a model for sustainable developement in green
>> >sector. We heard these words called integrated,
>> >sustainability, conservation, etc etc. Often used and
>> >abused, at the end of the day  what we have seen so
>> far
>> >was that few projects came and  in the name of these
>>
>> >words. The exit of the projects would be with one final
>>
>> >report and this report would be filed in some corner of
>>
>> >the concerned office. What do we see in this model
>> ? Few
>> >infrastructures, few study trainings and trips abroads
>>
>> >for the project participants and basically that is the
>>
>> >model.  
>> > is this what is meant by sustainable and integration?
>> >  
>> > Well our policies regarding environmetal conservations
>>
>> >are very good and so are the plocies for communities
>> >forestry etc. But we have never seen a sustainble model
>>
>> >here too, they are to skewed to either right or left at
>>
>> >the end we are the losers. In order to sustain these
>> good
>> >policies, huge costs are incurred for example be it be
>>
>> >communities forests or state owned.. there are costs. 
>>
>> >Government has to maintained large number of people to
>>
>> >look after our forests ..this is nothing but costs in
>> >econmic terms, just imagine how much of new plantation
>>
>> >could have be established with the salaries that we pay
>>
>> >to our forestry staffs.
>> > There are more costs such as crops losses to wild
>> >animals, domestic animals predation by wild
>> ones..simply
>> >gurading the crops in the field is economic as well as
>>
>> >social costs. There are endless costs variables but
>> what
>> >are we gaining ?  Generally speaking, the losses are
>> more
>> >than the gains.. strictly speaking in line with market
>>
>> >economy.
>> >  
>> > So What is next then? We can ask ourselves is this
>> >sustainable?  May be not . What do we get out of all
>> these
>> >conservations efforts? The outcome of  good policies
>>
>> >are the services and one of the biggest services is
>> >quality water for the electricity production. In this
>>
>> >connection i would like to present a model where i
>> would
>> >see some sustainability and integration.  May be this
>>
>> >model is not new, if so  I am ignorant about it:
>> >  
>> > Under this model, it is seen  that hydro power is
>> the
>> >biggest output/services out of all the costs involve in
>>
>> >our conservation efforts. Since everything is connected
>>
>> >to everything we must put the pieces together.
>> > Under this model it is proposed that the hydropwer
>> >pays "green tax" (GT) above the existing market price
>> and
>> >the GT goes to an insurance ( here we need to
>> eatblished
>> >an insurance company or can be integrated into exiting
>>
>> >one with specialsed branch, be nice to operate with
>> >existing one to keep the operation cost low). Now the
>> >insurance company will pay the compensation to those
>> who
>> >loss ( of course we need to developed strict internal
>> >regulations for claims). As the money accumates in
>> >insurance, when it will exceed the required sum, some
>> of
>> >the money can be used for financing rural
>> >enterprises/ developement such as ecotourisms, village
>> >tourism etc.
>> >  
>> > I think that will be sustainble.. and also
>> integrated. 
>> >Once we have such established system, then individuals
>>
>> >who are conservation oriented  can also contribute to
>>
>> >such insurance and also we can hook the global C
>> trading
>> >within such system.
>> >  
>> > However, it is a geopolitical decisions.. but in light
>>
>> >of climate change we should push for such model.
>> > This much for now.. the floor is open for active
>> >discussion.
>> >  
>> > Best regards
>> >  
>> > Purna
>> >  
>> >
>> >
>> >     
>> > --
>> > This message has been scanned for viruses and
>> > dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
>> > believed to be clean.
>> > --Postmaster, DrukNet.
>> >
>>
>> ++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++
>> Advertise your tenders for free. Contact 326919 for more
>> information.
>> ++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++
>>
>>
>> ------------ --------- --------- ------
>>
>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>
>>     Bhutan-eForest- fullfeatured@ yahoogroups. com
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.
> --
> Postmaster, DrukNet.
>

++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++
Advertise your tenders for free. Contact 326919 for more information.
++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++

From: Tashi Wangchuk <chentop73@...>
Subject: Re: {Disarmed} Re: {Disarmed} [Bhutan-eForest] PES, Conservation and sustainability: A Model
To: Bhutan-eForest@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, November 11, 2009, 6:32 PM

Dear Ngawang and Purna,   Nice to read your posts.  I agree on both of you and more on Ngawang where he says, the benefits should go to the communities, I really like that concern.   Regarding the benefits to the communities, I has posted in KOL discussion forum on the topic of tourism expansion in Bhutan. I think we may start with what is going at present in Bhutan...the ecotourism. For me I think PES and CC in Bhutan is beyond our decision, anyhow we can still have our say and hope it will somehow pinch the decision makers and policy makers at higher level.   In tourism sector, there was a plan (in KOL) to increase the target by 25,000 tourist every year and later again there was consultant brought from outside and our government (GNHC) has approved the proposal. I found it rediculous because before we study the carrying capacity, and before we have positive and negative impacts research dones, its a blind decision. One example I heard from a relevant sourece: The Nabji-Korphu Ecotourism does not benefit people at a significant level, instead the negative impacts were more. People of Nabji-Korphu benefits merely employed as porter and pony, but then the wages paid to them is just sufficient for couple of beer bottles, (they have to drink because they were really tired!), go to home drunk, have homestead conflicts and chores.   Like wise we need to raise our voice when the government decided to have mining in one of our national parks, the smae story is from KOL.   To me talking about PES, CC, REDD is far beyond our discussion if we compare what is happening now in our country.   Cheers   --- On Wed, 11/11/09, Nawang Gyeltshen <nawangfrdd@...> wrote: From: Nawang Gyeltshen <nawangfrdd@...> Subject: Re: {Disarmed} Re: {Disarmed} [Bhutan-eForest] PES, Conservation and sustainability: A Model To: Bhutan-eForest@yahoogroups.com Date: Wednesday, November 11, 2009, 6:57 AM   Dear PB sir, I very much understand what you intend to speak on, cos these have been the voices of foresters for years. Unfortunately we always talk on plough-back mechanisms and mostly try to equate with cash. Why should we? The hydrpower revenue is already going to national finance....and they are paying royalty. My idea of plough-back mechanism is...when you have mega projects in an area, leave something for the nature & community since the community have conserved and depended on the natural resources there, and by our intervention it is disturbing their natural ecosystem. Let any one do it...hydropower projects, NRDCL, or any one...most recommended in an integrated approach by involving our technical expertise! I don't believe we should get cash from project beneficiaries in the name of plough-back. The plough-back incentive should go to communities directly...We are getting paid for doing our job, so does everyone... For example, when NRDCL operates in an area; all we are asking is leave something for the nature...plant trees, improve the forest !!! leave something for communities. ..build a bridge, construct a better local water supply etc. That to me, is a true PLOUGH-BACK. Yes Sir, It is indeed a big big task - I agree. I am going back from my funded trip to serve, why don't you leave your funded studies too and join me? MOA needs us...hehehehe. On personal note, as always I enjoy reading your arguments and cannot help myself provoke you to hear more!!! Regards, Ngawang Gyeltshen Senior Forestry Officer, Department of Forests. On Tue, 10 Nov 2009 02:24:22 -0800 (PST) purna chhetri <purnab_2000@ yahoo.com> wrote: > Dear Ngawang > Thanks for teh quick response. Well, as you have pointed >that my point are / were discussed, well it is not the >first time, when we started working in Gamrichu watershed >planning we talk about so called plogh back mechanism >with hydro people. But this doesnot work, we need to set >up insurance to distribute the benefits, it will be not >business usual. We need to tax and put the tax in >insurance, accumulate the capital there and use it >sustainbly. > It is big task but we can start working on that model.If >things has to be done in different ways in sutainable >manner. But if you just enjoy going around with FAO >funding and stop middle of nowhere..that is business >usual > > Best regards > Purna > > --- On Tue, 11/10/09, Nawang Gyeltshen ><nawangfrdd@druknet. bt> wrote: > >> From: Nawang Gyeltshen <nawangfrdd@druknet. bt> >> Subject: Re: {Disarmed} [Bhutan-eForest] PES, >>Conservation and sustainability: A Model >> To: Bhutan-eForest@ yahoogroups. com >> Date: Tuesday, November 10, 2009, 12:31 AM >> Dear PB Sir, >> >> Congratulations on your new post in Vienna, you made us >> proud. First things first, discuss on the visa issue and >> sort that out. It seems its just a lame pretext >>everytime. >> >> For Tashi Samdrup, he studied in Europe and needed no >> authentication of certificates yet he was late too. Sort >> that out. We tried all means from our side. And with >> Dr.georg, try getting more Bhutanese there. You are >> therefore contributing to capacity building and then >>your >> model will be realistic... haha. >> >> On serious note, PES is a hot topic today in Bhutan and >>we >> >> already discussed most of your points. Hydropower pasy >> some 1% royalty for that...but we discussed on the need >> for other means thereby contributing to our watershed >> management. From the Policy we derived so many >>subsidiary >> documents for its effective implementation (job insured >> for Bhutanese foresters retiring soon). Please refer to >> Resolutions of Foresrty Conference, which is half the >>list >> >> we came out with nevertheless. .. >> >> Your ideas as always are wise and good to listen. I will >> share that in a meeting with Watershed Division some >>time. >> >> Regards, >> >> Ngawang Gyeltshen >> Senior Forestry Officer, >> Department of Forests >> >> On Mon, 9 Nov 2009 20:47:14 -0800 (PST) >>   purna chhetri <purnab_2000@ yahoo.com> >> wrote: >> > Dear All >> > While,  when good debate is going on let me break an >> ice >> >with a model for sustainable developement in green >> >sector. We heard these words called integrated, >> >sustainability, conservation, etc etc. Often used and >> >abused, at the end of the day  what we have seen so >> far >> >was that few projects came and  in the name of these >> >> >words. The exit of the projects would be with one final >> >> >report and this report would be filed in some corner of >> >> >the concerned office. What do we see in this model >> ? Few >> >infrastructures, few study trainings and trips abroads >> >> >for the project participants and basically that is the >> >> >model.   >> > is this what is meant by sustainable and integration? >> >   >> > Well our policies regarding environmetal conservations >> >> >are very good and so are the plocies for communities >> >forestry etc. But we have never seen a sustainble model >> >> >here too, they are to skewed to either right or left at >> >> >the end we are the losers. In order to sustain these >> good >> >policies, huge costs are incurred for example be it be >> >> >communities forests or state owned.. there are costs.  >> >> >Government has to maintained large number of people to >> >> >look after our forests ..this is nothing but costs in >> >econmic terms, just imagine how much of new plantation >> >> >could have be established with the salaries that we pay >> >> >to our forestry staffs. >> > There are more costs such as crops losses to wild >> >animals, domestic animals predation by wild >> ones..simply >> >gurading the crops in the field is economic as well as >> >> >social costs. There are endless costs variables but >> what >> >are we gaining ?  Generally speaking, the losses are >> more >> >than the gains.. strictly speaking in line with market >> >> >economy. >> >   >> > So What is next then? We can ask ourselves is this >> >sustainable?  May be not . What do we get out of all >> these >> >conservations efforts? The outcome of  good policies >> >> >are the services and one of the biggest services is >> >quality water for the electricity production. In this >> >> >connection i would like to present a model where i >> would >> >see some sustainability and integration.  May be this >> >> >model is not new, if so  I am ignorant about it: >> >   >> > Under this model, it is seen  that hydro power is >> the >> >biggest output/services out of all the costs involve in >> >> >our conservation efforts. Since everything is connected >> >> >to everything we must put the pieces together. >> > Under this model it is proposed that the hydropwer >> >pays "green tax" (GT) above the existing market price >> and >> >the GT goes to an insurance ( here we need to >> eatblished >> >an insurance company or can be integrated into exiting >> >> >one with specialsed branch, be nice to operate with >> >existing one to keep the operation cost low). Now the >> >insurance company will pay the compensation to those >> who >> >loss ( of course we need to developed strict internal >> >regulations for claims). As the money accumates in >> >insurance, when it will exceed the required sum, some >> of >> >the money can be used for financing rural >> >enterprises/ developement such as ecotourisms, village >> >tourism etc. >> >   >> > I think that will be sustainble.. and also >> integrated.  >> >Once we have such established system, then individuals >> >> >who are conservation oriented  can also contribute to >> >> >such insurance and also we can hook the global C >> trading >> >within such system. >> >   >> > However, it is a geopolitical decisions.. but in light >> >> >of climate change we should push for such model. >> > This much for now.. the floor is open for active >> >discussion. >> >   >> > Best regards >> >   >> > Purna >> >   >> > >> > >> >      >> > -- >> > This message has been scanned for viruses and >> > dangerous content by MailScanner, and is >> > believed to be clean. >> > --Postmaster, DrukNet. >> > >> >> ++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++ >> Advertise your tenders for free. Contact 326919 for more >> information. >> ++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++ >> >> >> ------------ --------- --------- ------ >> >> Yahoo! Groups Links >> >> >>     Bhutan-eForest- fullfeatured@ yahoogroups. com >> >> >> > > > > > -- > This message has been scanned for viruses and > dangerous content by MailScanner, and is > believed to be clean. > -- > Postmaster, DrukNet. > ++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++ Advertise your tenders for free. Contact 326919 for more information. ++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++

From: purna chhetri <purnab_2000@...>
Subject: Re: {Disarmed} Re: {Disarmed} [Bhutan-eForest] PES, Conservation and sustainability: A Model
To: Bhutan-eForest@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, November 11, 2009, 11:35 PM

 

Dear Tashi Thanks for the comments, im not saying we can do less with the model that i have presented . Well, you have to see the grassroot level of awarenss also. Our communities are still not very cohesive and requires another additional time to make things working. As you have pointed out the Nubji-Korphu already. This particular example shows our communities are not prepared themselves to face the challeges, we need to teach them, how they should handle the local economic activities to create decent jobs for themselves. I am sorry, but i have to point out this.. the community funding you are talking about would just benefit those who handles it not the communities. In light of all these it is better government at national level estblished institution which will be responsible handling compenations, financing rural enterprises like village tourism, local products developement, but it should be sustainable. As a way forward it would be better to get it from our services, rather than adhoc offers from here and there. Best regards Purna --- On Wed, 11/11/09, Tashi Wangchuk <chentop73@yahoo. com> wrote: From: Tashi Wangchuk <chentop73@yahoo. com> Subject: Re: {Disarmed} Re: {Disarmed} [Bhutan-eForest] PES, Conservation and sustainability: A Model To: Bhutan-eForest@ yahoogroups. com Date: Wednesday, November 11, 2009, 6:32 PM Dear Ngawang and Purna,   Nice to read your posts.  I agree on both of you and more on Ngawang where he says, the benefits should go to the communities, I really like that concern.   Regarding the benefits to the communities, I has posted in KOL discussion forum on the topic of tourism expansion in Bhutan. I think we may start with what is going at present in Bhutan...the ecotourism. For me I think PES and CC in Bhutan is beyond our decision, anyhow we can still have our say and hope it will somehow pinch the decision makers and policy makers at higher level.   In tourism sector, there was a plan (in KOL) to increase the target by 25,000 tourist every year and later again there was consultant brought from outside and our government (GNHC) has approved the proposal. I found it rediculous because before we study the carrying capacity, and before we have positive and negative impacts research dones, its a blind decision. One example I heard from a relevant sourece: The Nabji-Korphu Ecotourism does not benefit people at a significant level, instead the negative impacts were more. People of Nabji-Korphu benefits merely employed as porter and pony, but then the wages paid to them is just sufficient for couple of beer bottles, (they have to drink because they were really tired!), go to home drunk, have homestead conflicts and chores.   Like wise we need to raise our voice when the government decided to have mining in one of our national parks, the smae story is from KOL.   To me talking about PES, CC, REDD is far beyond our discussion if we compare what is happening now in our country.   Cheers   --- On Wed, 11/11/09, Nawang Gyeltshen <nawangfrdd@druknet. bt> wrote: From: Nawang Gyeltshen <nawangfrdd@druknet. bt> Subject: Re: {Disarmed} Re: {Disarmed} [Bhutan-eForest] PES, Conservation and sustainability: A Model To: Bhutan-eForest@ yahoogroups. com Date: Wednesday, November 11, 2009, 6:57 AM   Dear PB sir, I very much understand what you intend to speak on, cos these have been the voices of foresters for years. Unfortunately we always talk on plough-back mechanisms and mostly try to equate with cash. Why should we? The hydrpower revenue is already going to national finance....and they are paying royalty. My idea of plough-back mechanism is...when you have mega projects in an area, leave something for the nature & community since the community have conserved and depended on the natural resources there, and by our intervention it is disturbing their natural ecosystem. Let any one do it...hydropower projects, NRDCL, or any one...most recommended in an integrated approach by involving our technical expertise! I don't believe we should get cash from project beneficiaries in the name of plough-back. The plough-back incentive should go to communities directly...We are getting paid for doing our job, so does everyone... For example, when NRDCL operates in an area; all we are asking is leave something for the nature...plant trees, improve the forest !!! leave something for communities. ..build a bridge, construct a better local water supply etc. That to me, is a true PLOUGH-BACK. Yes Sir, It is indeed a big big task - I agree. I am going back from my funded trip to serve, why don't you leave your funded studies too and join me? MOA needs us...hehehehe. On personal note, as always I enjoy reading your arguments and cannot help myself provoke you to hear more!!! Regards, Ngawang Gyeltshen Senior Forestry Officer, Department of Forests. On Tue, 10 Nov 2009 02:24:22 -0800 (PST) purna chhetri <purnab_2000@ yahoo.com> wrote: > Dear Ngawang > Thanks for teh quick response. Well, as you have pointed >that my point are / were discussed, well it is not the >first time, when we started working in Gamrichu watershed >planning we talk about so called plogh back mechanism >with hydro people. But this doesnot work, we need to set >up insurance to distribute the benefits, it will be not >business usual. We need to tax and put the tax in >insurance, accumulate the capital there and use it >sustainbly. > It is big task but we can start working on that model.If >things has to be done in different ways in sutainable >manner. But if you just enjoy going around with FAO >funding and stop middle of nowhere..that is business >usual > > Best regards > Purna > > --- On Tue, 11/10/09, Nawang Gyeltshen ><nawangfrdd@druknet. bt> wrote: > >> From: Nawang Gyeltshen <nawangfrdd@druknet. bt> >> Subject: Re: {Disarmed} [Bhutan-eForest] PES, >>Conservation and sustainability: A Model >> To: Bhutan-eForest@ yahoogroups. com >> Date: Tuesday, November 10, 2009, 12:31 AM >> Dear PB Sir, >> >> Congratulations on your new post in Vienna, you made us >> proud. First things first, discuss on the visa issue and >> sort that out. It seems its just a lame pretext >>everytime. >> >> For Tashi Samdrup, he studied in Europe and needed no >> authentication of certificates yet he was late too. Sort >> that out. We tried all means from our side. And with >> Dr.georg, try getting more Bhutanese there. You are >> therefore contributing to capacity building and then >>your >> model will be realistic... haha. >> >> On serious note, PES is a hot topic today in Bhutan and >>we >> >> already discussed most of your points. Hydropower pasy >> some 1% royalty for that...but we discussed on the need >> for other means thereby contributing to our watershed >> management. From the Policy we derived so many >>subsidiary >> documents for its effective implementation (job insured >> for Bhutanese foresters retiring soon). Please refer to >> Resolutions of Foresrty Conference, which is half the >>list >> >> we came out with nevertheless. .. >> >> Your ideas as always are wise and good to listen. I will >> share that in a meeting with Watershed Division some >>time. >> >> Regards, >> >> Ngawang Gyeltshen >> Senior Forestry Officer, >> Department of Forests >> >> On Mon, 9 Nov 2009 20:47:14 -0800 (PST) >>   purna chhetri <purnab_2000@ yahoo.com> >> wrote: >> > Dear All >> > While,  when good debate is going on let me break an >> ice >> >with a model for sustainable developement in green >> >sector. We heard these words called integrated, >> >sustainability, conservation, etc etc. Often used and >> >abused, at the end of the day  what we have seen so >> far >> >was that few projects came and  in the name of these >> >> >words. The exit of the projects would be with one final >> >> >report and this report would be filed in some corner of >> >> >the concerned office. What do we see in this model >> ? Few >> >infrastructures, few study trainings and trips abroads >> >> >for the project participants and basically that is the >> >> >model.   >> > is this what is meant by sustainable and integration? >> >   >> > Well our policies regarding environmetal conservations >> >> >are very good and so are the plocies for communities >> >forestry etc. But we have never seen a sustainble model >> >> >here too, they are to skewed to either right or left at >> >> >the end we are the losers. In order to sustain these >> good >> >policies, huge costs are incurred for example be it be >> >> >communities forests or state owned.. there are costs.  >> >> >Government has to maintained large number of people to >> >> >look after our forests ..this is nothing but costs in >> >econmic terms, just imagine how much of new plantation >> >> >could have be established with the salaries that we pay >> >> >to our forestry staffs. >> > There are more costs such as crops losses to wild >> >animals, domestic animals predation by wild >> ones..simply >> >gurading the crops in the field is economic as well as >> >> >social costs. There are endless costs variables but >> what >> >are we gaining ?  Generally speaking, the losses are >> more >> >than the gains.. strictly speaking in line with market >> >> >economy. >> >   >> > So What is next then? We can ask ourselves is this >> >sustainable?  May be not . What do we get out of all >> these >> >conservations efforts? The outcome of  good policies >> >> >are the services and one of the biggest services is >> >quality water for the electricity production. In this >> >> >connection i would like to present a model where i >> would >> >see some sustainability and integration.  May be this >> >> >model is not new, if so  I am ignorant about it: >> >   >> > Under this model, it is seen  that hydro power is >> the >> >biggest output/services out of all the costs involve in >> >> >our conservation efforts. Since everything is connected >> >> >to everything we must put the pieces together. >> > Under this model it is proposed that the hydropwer >> >pays "green tax" (GT) above the existing market price >> and >> >the GT goes to an insurance ( here we need to >> eatblished >> >an insurance company or can be integrated into exiting >> >> >one with specialsed branch, be nice to operate with >> >existing one to keep the operation cost low). Now the >> >insurance company will pay the compensation to those >> who >> >loss ( of course we need to developed strict internal >> >regulations for claims). As the money accumates in >> >insurance, when it will exceed the required sum, some >> of >> >the money can be used for financing rural >> >enterprises/ developement such as ecotourisms, village >> >tourism etc. >> >   >> > I think that will be sustainble.. and also >> integrated.  >> >Once we have such established system, then individuals >> >> >who are conservation oriented  can also contribute to >> >> >such insurance and also we can hook the global C >> trading >> >within such system. >> >   >> > However, it is a geopolitical decisions.. but in light >> >> >of climate change we should push for such model. >> > This much for now.. the floor is open for active >> >discussion. >> >   >> > Best regards >> >   >> > Purna >> >   >> > >> > >> >      >> > -- >> > This message has been scanned for viruses and >> > dangerous content by MailScanner, and is >> > believed to be clean. >> > --Postmaster, DrukNet. >> > >> >> ++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++ >> Advertise your tenders for free. Contact 326919 for more >> information. >> ++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++ >> >> >> ------------ --------- --------- ------ >> >> Yahoo! Groups Links >> >> >>     Bhutan-eForest- fullfeatured@ yahoogroups. com >> >> >> > > > > > -- > This message has been scanned for viruses and > dangerous content by MailScanner, and is > believed to be clean. > -- > Postmaster, DrukNet. > ++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++ Advertise your tenders for free. Contact 326919 for more information. ++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++

From: Nawang Gyeltshen <nawangfrdd@...>
Subject: Re: {Disarmed} Re: {Disarmed} Re: {Disarmed} [Bhutan-eForest] PES, Conservation and sustainability: A Model
To: Bhutan-eForest@yahoogroups.com
Date: Thursday, November 12, 2009, 2:07 AM

 

Tashi,

On your note on Forest Policy, it is disheartening to hear
such critics from Foresters within. The new Policy is a
paradigm shift to guide forestry's new phase in the
country and even FAO recognizes this as a model, the
reason for which Bhutan has been selected to host the next
Asia-Pacific Forestry Commission in 2010.

The old policy treats forests as national exchequer, while
the new policy is much holistic with so many opportunities
for the country and people. It went through intensive
regional consultations and the core group worked very
hard, I must inform all. We presented the draft to
Department, then to Ministry...we also invited the Natural
resources and environment committes of NA & NC (they were
very impressed). Finally we presented it to the national
stakeholders of about 100 participants including local
governance. End of November, Secrtetary will be presenting
it to the GNHC committe and then finally Lyonpo will
endorse through Cabinet. By December we anticipate the
apporved policy.

I clearly remember posting it here so many times for
comments and to all individual e-mails I know and had
collected from various workshops.

This is a reminder to all on the hardwork and commitment
from FAO and our Policy and further support on its
implementation.

Regards,

Ngawang Gyeltshen
Senior Forestry Officer
Department of Forests

On Thu, 12 Nov 2009 01:15:25 -0800 (PST)
Tashi Wangchuk <chentop73@yahoo. com> wrote:
> Purna sir,
>  
> I understood your point and I knew the logic behind your
>posts. Though am a forester by profession (though less
>educated) but I am more towards people oriented or say
>participatory forest management. Even in the case of
>Nabji-Korphu ecotourism, thogh they involve people and
>proudly say it benefits the people, and its sort of
>participatory, Yes to some extent, its participatory. But
>there are also different kinds/types of participation. In
>case of that ecotourism, I assume that the decision is
>already made. Even for the new Forest policy I have big
>question in myself. Though the policy is formulated with
>consultation among different stakeholders, but I assume
>most of the decisions are predetermined by the forester.
>I hope Nagwang can clarify more for me if am wrong.
>  
> There are many instances; the establishment of FMU,
>decentralized activities of the Dzongkhag Forestry
>sector, establishment of CF, etc. They all talk about
>participation but the people's real participations are/is
>driven either through incentives or through force (rule
>of law!)
>  
> What I want is give or provide more benefits to the
>rural people. The awareness is going on and its now an
>annual event in every sector. People are cohesive and
>thats why many farmers' association were able to function
>well.
>  
> I will appreciate more discussion.
>  
> Regards
>
> --- On Wed, 11/11/09, purna chhetri
><purnab_2000@ yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>From: purna chhetri <purnab_2000@ yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: {Disarmed} Re: {Disarmed} [Bhutan-eForest]
>PES, Conservation and sustainability: A Model
> To: Bhutan-eForest@ yahoogroups. com
> Date: Wednesday, November 11, 2009, 11:35 PM
>
>
>  
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Dear Tashi
> Thanks for the comments, im not saying we can do less
>with the model that i have presented . Well, you have to
>see the grassroot level of awarenss also. Our communities
>are still not very cohesive and requires another
>additional time to make things working. As you have
>pointed out the Nubji-Korphu already. This particular
>example shows our communities are not prepared themselves
>to face the challeges, we need to teach them, how they
>should handle the local economic activities to create
>decent jobs for themselves. I am sorry, but i have to
>point out this.. the community funding you are talking
>about would just benefit those who handles it not the
>communities. In light of all these it is better
>government at national level estblished institution which
>will be responsible handling compenations, financing
>rural enterprises like village tourism, local products
>developement, but it should be sustainable. As a way
>forward it would be better to get it from our
> services, rather than adhoc offers from here and there.
> Best regards
> Purna
>
> --- On Wed, 11/11/09, Tashi Wangchuk <chentop73@yahoo.
>com> wrote:
>
>
>From: Tashi Wangchuk <chentop73@yahoo. com>
> Subject: Re: {Disarmed} Re: {Disarmed} [Bhutan-eForest]
>PES, Conservation and sustainability: A Model
> To: Bhutan-eForest@ yahoogroups. com
> Date: Wednesday, November 11, 2009, 6:32 PM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Dear Ngawang and Purna,
>  
> Nice to read your posts.  I agree on both of you and
>more on Ngawang where he says, the benefits should go to
>the communities, I really like that concern.
>  
> Regarding the benefits to the communities, I has posted
>in KOL discussion forum on the topic of tourism expansion
>in Bhutan. I think we may start with what is going at
>present in Bhutan...the ecotourism. For me I think PES
>and CC in Bhutan is beyond our decision, anyhow we can
>still have our say and hope it will somehow pinch the
>decision makers and policy makers at higher level.
>  
> In tourism sector, there was a plan (in KOL) to increase
>the target by 25,000 tourist every year and later again
>there was consultant brought from outside and our
>government (GNHC) has approved the proposal. I found it
>rediculous because before we study the carrying capacity,
>and before we have positive and negative impacts research
>dones, its a blind decision. One example I heard from a
>relevant sourece: The Nabji-Korphu Ecotourism does not
>benefit people at a significant level, instead the
>negative impacts were more. People of Nabji-Korphu
>benefits merely employed as porter and pony, but then the
>wages paid to them is just sufficient for couple of beer
>bottles, (they have to drink because they were really
>tired!), go to home drunk, have homestead conflicts and
>chores.
>  
> Like wise we need to raise our voice when the government
>decided to have mining in one of our national parks, the
>smae story is from KOL.
>  
> To me talking about PES, CC, REDD is far beyond our
>discussion if we compare what is happening now in our
>country.
>  
> Cheers
>  
>
> --- On Wed, 11/11/09, Nawang Gyeltshen
><nawangfrdd@ druknet. bt> wrote:
>
>
>From: Nawang Gyeltshen <nawangfrdd@ druknet. bt>
> Subject: Re: {Disarmed} Re: {Disarmed} [Bhutan-eForest]
>PES, Conservation and sustainability: A Model
> To: Bhutan-eForest@ yahoogroups. com
> Date: Wednesday, November 11, 2009, 6:57 AM
>
>
>  
>
> Dear PB sir,
>
> I very much understand what you intend to speak on, cos
> these have been the voices of foresters for years.
> Unfortunately we always talk on plough-back mechanisms
>and
> mostly try to equate with cash. Why should we? The
> hydrpower revenue is already going to national
> finance....and they are paying royalty.
>
> My idea of plough-back mechanism is...when you have mega
> projects in an area, leave something for the nature &
> community since the community have conserved and
>depended
> on the natural resources there, and by our intervention
>it
> is disturbing their natural ecosystem. Let any one do
> it...hydropower projects, NRDCL, or any one...most
> recommended in an integrated approach by involving our
> technical expertise! I don't believe we should get cash
> from project beneficiaries in the name of plough-back.
>The
> plough-back incentive should go to communities
> directly...We are getting paid for doing our job, so
>does
> everyone...
>
>For example, when NRDCL operates in an area; all we are
> asking is leave something for the nature...plant trees,
> improve the forest !!! leave something for
> communities. ..build a bridge, construct a better local
> water supply etc. That to me, is a true PLOUGH-BACK.
>
> Yes Sir, It is indeed a big big task - I agree. I am
>going
> back from my funded trip to serve, why don't you leave
> your funded studies too and join me? MOA needs
> us...hehehehe.
> On personal note, as always I enjoy reading your
>arguments
> and cannot help myself provoke you to hear more!!!
>
> Regards,
>
> Ngawang Gyeltshen
> Senior Forestry Officer,
> Department of Forests.
>
> On Tue, 10 Nov 2009 02:24:22 -0800 (PST)
> purna chhetri <purnab_2000@ yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Dear Ngawang
>> Thanks for teh quick response. Well, as you have pointed
>>that my point are / were discussed, well it is not the
>>first time, when we started working in Gamrichu watershed
>>planning we talk about so called plogh back mechanism
>>with hydro people. But this doesnot work, we need to set
>>up insurance to distribute the benefits, it will be not
>>business usual. We need to tax and put the tax in
>>insurance, accumulate the capital there and use it
>>sustainbly.
>> It is big task but we can start working on that model.If
>>things has to be done in different ways in sutainable
>>manner. But if you just enjoy going around with FAO
>>funding and stop middle of nowhere..that is business
>>usual
>>
>> Best regards
>> Purna
>>
>> --- On Tue, 11/10/09, Nawang Gyeltshen
>><nawangfrdd@ druknet. bt> wrote:
>>
>>> From: Nawang Gyeltshen <nawangfrdd@ druknet. bt>
>>> Subject: Re: {Disarmed} [Bhutan-eForest] PES,
>>>Conservation and sustainability: A Model
>>> To: Bhutan-eForest@ yahoogroups. com
>>> Date: Tuesday, November 10, 2009, 12:31 AM
>>> Dear PB Sir,
>>>
>>> Congratulations on your new post in Vienna, you made us
>>> proud. First things first, discuss on the visa issue and
>>> sort that out. It seems its just a lame pretext
>>>everytime.
>>>
>>> For Tashi Samdrup, he studied in Europe and needed no
>>> authentication of certificates yet he was late too. Sort
>>> that out. We tried all means from our side. And with
>>> Dr.georg, try getting more Bhutanese there. You are
>>> therefore contributing to capacity building and then
>>>your
>>> model will be realistic... haha.
>>>
>>> On serious note, PES is a hot topic today in Bhutan and
>>>we
>>>
>>> already discussed most of your points. Hydropower pasy
>>> some 1% royalty for that...but we discussed on the need
>>> for other means thereby contributing to our watershed
>>> management. From the Policy we derived so many
>>>subsidiary
>>> documents for its effective implementation (job insured
>>> for Bhutanese foresters retiring soon). Please refer to
>>> Resolutions of Foresrty Conference, which is half the
>>>list
>>>
>>> we came out with nevertheless. ..
>>>
>>> Your ideas as always are wise and good to listen. I will
>>> share that in a meeting with Watershed Division some
>>>time.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Ngawang Gyeltshen
>>> Senior Forestry Officer,
>>> Department of Forests
>>>
>>> On Mon, 9 Nov 2009 20:47:14 -0800 (PST)
>>>   purna chhetri <purnab_2000@ yahoo.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> > Dear All
>>> > While,  when good debate is going on let me break an
>>> ice
>>> >with a model for sustainable developement in green
>>> >sector. We heard these words called integrated,
>>> >sustainability, conservation, etc etc. Often used and
>>> >abused, at the end of the day  what we have seen so
>>> far
>>> >was that few projects came and  in the name of these
>>>
>>> >words. The exit of the projects would be with one final
>>>
>>> >report and this report would be filed in some corner of
>>>
>>> >the concerned office. What do we see in this model
>>> ? Few
>>> >infrastructures, few study trainings and trips abroads
>>>
>>> >for the project participants and basically that is the
>>>
>>> >model.  
>>> > is this what is meant by sustainable and integration?
>>> >  
>>> > Well our policies regarding environmetal conservations
>>>
>>> >are very good and so are the plocies for communities
>>> >forestry etc. But we have never seen a sustainble model
>>>
>>> >here too, they are to skewed to either right or left at
>>>
>>> >the end we are the losers. In order to sustain these
>>> good
>>> >policies, huge costs are incurred for example be it be
>>>
>>> >communities forests or state owned.. there are costs. 
>>>
>>> >Government has to maintained large number of people to
>>>
>>> >look after our forests ..this is nothing but costs in
>>> >econmic terms, just imagine how much of new plantation
>>>
>>> >could have be established with the salaries that we pay
>>>
>>> >to our forestry staffs.
>>> > There are more costs such as crops losses to wild
>>> >animals, domestic animals predation by wild
>>> ones..simply
>>> >gurading the crops in the field is economic as well as
>>>
>>> >social costs. There are endless costs variables but
>>> what
>>> >are we gaining ?  Generally speaking, the losses are
>>> more
>>> >than the gains.. strictly speaking in line with market
>>>
>>> >economy.
>>> >  
>>> > So What is next then? We can ask ourselves is this
>>> >sustainable?  May be not . What do we get out of all
>>> these
>>> >conservations efforts? The outcome of  good policies
>>>
>>> >are the services and one of the biggest services is
>>> >quality water for the electricity production. In this
>>>
>>> >connection i would like to present a model where i
>>> would
>>> >see some sustainability and integration.  May be this
>>>
>>> >model is not new, if so  I am ignorant about it:
>>> >  
>>> > Under this model, it is seen  that hydro power is
>>> the
>>> >biggest output/services out of all the costs involve in
>>>
>>> >our conservation efforts. Since everything is connected
>>>
>>> >to everything we must put the pieces together.
>>> > Under this model it is proposed that the hydropwer
>>> >pays "green tax" (GT) above the existing market price
>>> and
>>> >the GT goes to an insurance ( here we need to
>>> eatblished
>>> >an insurance company or can be integrated into exiting
>>>
>>> >one with specialsed branch, be nice to operate with
>>> >existing one to keep the operation cost low). Now the
>>> >insurance company will pay the compensation to those
>>> who
>>> >loss ( of course we need to developed strict internal
>>> >regulations for claims). As the money accumates in
>>> >insurance, when it will exceed the required sum, some
>>> of
>>> >the money can be used for financing rural
>>> >enterprises/ developement such as ecotourisms, village
>>> >tourism etc.
>>> >  
>>> > I think that will be sustainble.. and also
>>> integrated. 
>>> >Once we have such established system, then individuals
>>>
>>> >who are conservation oriented  can also contribute to
>>>
>>> >such insurance and also we can hook the global C
>>> trading
>>> >within such system.
>>> >  
>>> > However, it is a geopolitical decisions.. but in light
>>>
>>> >of climate change we should push for such model.
>>> > This much for now.. the floor is open for active
>>> >discussion.
>>> >  
>>> > Best regards
>>> >  
>>> > Purna
>>> >  
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >     
>>> > --
>>> > This message has been scanned for viruses and
>>> > dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
>>> > believed to be clean.
>>> > --Postmaster, DrukNet.
>>> >
>>>
>>> ++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++
>>>+++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++
>>> Advertise your tenders for free. Contact 326919 for more
>>> information.
>>> ++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++
>>>+++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------ --------- --------- ------
>>>
>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>>
>>>
>>>     Bhutan-eForest- fullfeatured@ yahoogroups. com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> This message has been scanned for viruses and
>> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
>> believed to be clean.
>> --
>> Postmaster, DrukNet.
>>
>
> ++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++
>+++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++
> Advertise your tenders for free. Contact 326919 for more
>information.
> ++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++
>+++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.
> --
> Postmaster, DrukNet.
>

++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++
Advertise your tenders for free. Contact 326919 for more information.
++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++

From: Tashi Wangchuk <chentop73@...>
Subject: Re: [Bhutan-eForest] new publication on biodiversity and climate change
To: Bhutan-eForest@yahoogroups.com
Date: Saturday, November 7, 2009, 5:11 PM

 

Dear all,   I agree with Mr. TN from NEC. I came to know that many people from Bhutan has been representing at the global scene regarding climate change and REDD. From my opinion as a layman in CC and REDD, people who participate in such global conventions should disemminate when back home. They might have done but for last 15 years of my service in DoF i have never heard of such informations.   The matter is with the "Forest Governance" in Bhutan. Not a single people will talk good about DoF, be it rural farmer or civil servant. Even within the DoF some forester do not like community forests to be expanded or encouraged at large scale.   Regarding the CC and REDD, what does our new policy say about it? And again I agree with Au TN, right persons are not in right places.   I can see Mr. Ngawang is dynamic and his view on mass education is necessary. --- On Fri, 11/6/09, Thinley Namgyel <tnamgyel@yahoo. com> wrote: From: Thinley Namgyel <tnamgyel@yahoo. com> Subject: Re: [Bhutan-eForest] new publication on biodiversity and climate change To: Bhutan-eForest@ yahoogroups. com Date: Friday, November 6, 2009, 4:22 AM   Hi everyone Thanks Doley for starting this conversation. Im glad Ngawang is finding the sessions very illuminating. Also glad to hear Mr Phuntsho is still active in this forum and appreciates the information from Lobang.  I've been attending these climate change negotiations on and off as well. I was at the last session in Bangkok in October along with other people from Dept of Energy and Dept of Forests. To provide some insight to those interested, here goes. What Ngawang is attending is the 2nd part of the meeting that took place in Bangkok in October. Its 7th one so far in two years and is called the "semi finals" leading up to the 15th Conference of Parties to the UNFCCC scheduled to take place in Dec this year.  There has been now about 8 meetings over the last two years under what is called the "Bali Action Plan" (BAP) started in December 2007 to come up with a treaty to deal with climate change that also includes the US and other major developing countries to reduce global emissions of greenhouse gases.  Major issues under BAP are (1) Mitigation of Emission (2) Adaptation to the adverse impacts of climate change (3) technology transfer (4) Capacity building (5) Financing to enable 1,2,3&4. Reducing emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD) is included here as well. At the same time another parallel session is going on to negotiate new targets for the rich countries under the Kyoto Protocol for the period beyond 2012.  Both the BAP and Kyoto Protocol negotiations have a deadline of Dec 2009 to produce some agreement. Thats why there is such a big deal about COP15. Ngawang's suggestion for NEC to train everyone is noted. However, we have been providing relevant information and trying to involve all relevant stakeholders for a while now. I'm not sure how many national workshops, seminars and bilateral meetings, official briefs, media interviews,events, email exchanges we can conduct so that everyone is informed in the country.  We've also been inviting and finding support for relevant sectors to participate in these climate change meetings since 2002. That's how Ngawang is now attending the session in Barcelona, as did Lobzang and many others from the Forestry sector. We hope this is enough capacity building for the Forestry sector to make its assessments and recommendations regarding the ongoing negotiations on REDD and LULUCF.  The problem is we get a different person at every meeting from the forestry sector (a problem not restricted to DOF by the way). Unfortunately these are not adhoc workshops or occassional meetings, but continuous negotiations. These type of issues requires some continuity (and Commitment from the participants) to ensure our national interests. All the representatives of the sectors at these meetings always make this same recommendation in their official report which i assume gets filed away somewhere. Also despite official requests for some consistency, it's a different person at every session in the name of equity. Its also going to be mostly a new set of people going to the concluding negotiations in December this year at COP15.  So as we say in Bhutan, "What to do"  Best regards to everyone Thinley Namgyel NEC   Thinley Namgyel, Thimphu, Bhutan --- On Fri, 11/6/09, Nawang Gyeltshen <nawangfrdd@druknet. bt> wrote: From: Nawang Gyeltshen <nawangfrdd@druknet. bt> Subject: Re: {Disarmed} Re: {Disarmed} [Bhutan-eForest] new publication on biodiversity and climate change To: Bhutan-eForest@ yahoogroups. com Date: Friday, November 6, 2009, 3:27 PM   Sir, Thank you for the encouraging words. Indeed! the Talks are interesting and makes one wise in a week. Countries come prepared! Most are veterans. My first time participation' s recommendations to the NEC would be to educate Bhutanese mass and especially train the stakeholders beforehand. The issues being discussed are of utmost importance - globally and very much locally; preparations are therefore very very vital. Sir and other colleagues, I will post a detailed report later. For any issues relating Climate Change and Forestry, please feel free to contact me. I have many reports gathered including soft copies & web links. Regards from Barcelona, Sincerely, Ngawang Gyeltshen Senior Forestry Officer, Department of Forests BHUTAN On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 19:43:49 -0800 (PST) Phuntsho Namgyel <phuntshonamgyel2001 @yahoo.com> wrote: > Dear Nawang Gyeltshen, > > Thank you for the posting on climate change >negotiations. Hearing it first hand on what and how >issues are discussed in international politics is very >exciting.  > > This reminds me of my one recent long morning walk with >Lobzang, former Samtse DFO and now working with >Puna-tshangchu Hydopower Power Project. I enjoyed hearing >him say his experiences as a country representative in >the climate change talks; how long drawn these talks can >be, oftentimes carrying through the night, and sometimes >this tactic is deliberate by some countries and >organizers to make delegates weary, and to make accept >the draft. And also every single word is scrutinized in >the draft for overt and covert implications; and how >countries align themselves and do to protect their >national interests or extract gain or benefits. I also >remember him say that though the role of forests in >climate change is appreciated, however there is no >agreement as how to account the value and payment modes >for climate services by forestlands, therefore the new >method of REDD (Reduced Emissions ?, I can't remember the >full.). > > Reading news is one thing. Hearing first hand of the >details, and the thoughts and emotions behind the news is >quite another. I indeed enjoyed that morning walk with >Lobzang, and I thought how much knowledge and experience >Lobzang carried with him with regard to international >climate change talks, which if shared would make more >Bhutanese knowledgeable about an important international >topic.  > > Nawang, once again thank you for the posting. Please >continue to brief us about your very important assignment >in Barcelona. > > And also thank you Doley for forwarding the document on >biodiversity and climate change. I enjoyed browsing >through it and felt happy to be updated on the subject. > > Kind regards, > > Phuntsho Namgyel > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ >From: Nawang Gyeltshen <nawangfrdd@druknet. bt> > To: Bhutan-eForest@ yahoogroups. com > Sent: Thu, November 5, 2009 4:28:10 PM > Subject: Re: {Disarmed} [Bhutan-eForest] new publication >on biodiversity and climate change > >   > Dear all, > > Coincidentally, I attended the presentation of the same > paper today. I am at the Climate Change Talks in >Barcelona > and UN/FAO/UNEP presented these various papers as > side-events under REDD. > > The REDD discussions are going on pretty smooth in the > contact group with strong focus on conservation and > sustainable forest management through REDD+ (also little > focus on indigenous people and traditional knowledge as > demanded by few nations and NGOs). The final decisions > will depend on Copenhagen outcome as we are still >revising > negotiating text here, but I am pretty confident looking > at the discussions among the contact group. The REDD+ > will be a huge advantage for Bhutan including capacity > building, technology, financing etc. for our >conservation > & sfm efforts. I will update more on the outcomes >through > a detailed report after the sessions here. > > As for LULUCF under Kyoto, discussions started late for > Kyoto as developing nations demanded numbers on table. >It > resumed yesterday, and till today we are still listening > to Country scenarios on historical emissions and future > projections. However, things seem to be flowing. I will > update on it too. > > Regards from Barcelona, > > Ngawang Gyeltshen > Senior Forestry Officer, > Department of Forests > BHUTAN > > On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 23:46:43 -0800 (PST) > Doley <dtshering@yahoo. com> wrote: >> Dear all, >> >> Greetings from Bangkok! >> >> Attached is a report by one of the Technical Groups of >>the CBD (Convention on Biological Diversity) on >>biodiversity and climate chage. The report was produced >>to provide biodiversity- relevant information to the >>UNFCCC. It makes interesting reading and distills current >>thinking around CC and biodiversity. With CC talks at >>full swing at Barcelona and Copehagen around the corner, >>it makes it imperative that the NRM team impresses on >>negotiators on the need to factor BD into any global >>climate deal at Copehagen. Hope this helps you in your >>efforts to make the case too. >> >> Best regards, >> Doley >> >> >> >> -- >> This message has been scanned for viruses and >> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is >> believed to be clean. >> --Postmaster, DrukNet. >> > > ++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ >+++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++ > Advertise your tenders for free. Contact 326919 for more >information. > ++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ >+++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++ > > > > > > -- > This message has been scanned for viruses and > dangerous content by MailScanner, and is > believed to be clean. > --Postmaster, DrukNet. > ++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++ Advertise your tenders for free. Contact 326919 for more information. ++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++ +++++

 

Please follow the link if intereted! http://www.umaine. edu/sustainabili tysolutions/ students/ opportunities. htm