VZCZCXRO9649
RR RUEHAST
DE RUEHBM #1233/01 2151615
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 031615Z AUG 06
FM AMEMBASSY BUCHAREST
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 4912
INFO RUEHZN/ENVIRONMENT SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY COLLECTIVE
RUEHZL/EUROPEAN POLITICAL COLLECTIVE
RUEHRC/USDA FAS WASHDC 0379
RUCPDOC/DEPT OF COMMERCE WASHDC
RUEAWJA/DOJ WASHDC

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 BUCHAREST 001233 
 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE PASS TO USAID 
FOR EUR/NCE - WILLIAM SILKWORTH 
FOR OES/PCI - ELLEN SHAW 
FOR ECA/PE/V/M - SUSAN LOCKWOOD/TAI DICKERSON 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: EAGR SENV ECON OIIP SOCI HU RO
SUBJECT: DEFORESTATION CONTINUES IN ROMANIA 
 
 
BUCHAREST 00001233  001.2 OF 003 
 
 
¶1. SUMMARY.  Poverty, corruption, a mismanaged land restitution 
process, and inadequate governmental resources and regulatory 
oversight have contributed to widespread and rapid deforestation in 
Romania since the 1989 revolution.  Many Romanians experienced 
firsthand the consequences of deforestation when some of the worst 
flooding in years hit the country in 2005.  Most experts agree that 
clear-cutting contributed to the devastating flash floods that took 
over 50 lives.  Illegal logging will remain a significant problem as 
the land restitution process continues and the GOR lacks the means 
to protect and manage the country's forests.  Romania is receiving 
assistance from the World Bank, European Union, United States and 
others to help combat the problem.  Ultimately, however, societal 
attitudes toward the environment must also change to ensure that the 
forests of Romania survive.  END SUMMARY. 
 
¶2. In preparation for this cable, ECON staff interviewed officials 
from the Romanian Ministry of Agriculture, Forests and Rural 
Development, the Ministry of Environment and Water Management, the 
National Forest Administration ("Romsilva"), The World Bank, World 
Wildlife Fund and Regional Environmental Center-Bucharest.  EconOff 
and Embassy Budapest's ESTH Hub Officer also visited Piatra Craiului 
National Park to witness the deforestation firsthand. 
 
FOREST STATISTICS 
----------------- 
¶3. Romania's 6.4 million hectares of forests cover less than 27 
percent of its territory (the European average is 32 percent). 
During communist times, the state owned all the forests.  Since 
then, about two million hectares of forest have been returned to 
their original owners, another 2 million are currently in the 
restitution process, and the final 2 million will remain under state 
ownership.  Official figures estimate that 125,000 hectares of 
forestland were illegally cut since 1991.  Of this amount, about 
30,000 hectares were completely clear-cut and 95,000 partially cut. 
 
MULTIPLE FACTORS DRIVE ILLEGAL LOGGING 
-------------------------------------- 
¶4. Many factors contribute to deforestation and illegal logging, 
including poverty, corruption, the poorly-implemented forest 
restitution process, a lack of governmental resources and oversight, 
and the low price of Romanian wood (thus making it more attractive 
to foreign buyers).  Unfortunately, the problem shows no sign of 
abating, at least not in the near term. 
 
¶5. The Romanian government returned forestlands to their rightful 
owners in three waves (1991, 2000 and 2005).  Poorly managed, the 
restitution process itself has contributed greatly to the 
deforestation problem.  The first wave targeted only individuals and 
capped the amount at one hectare per person.  The second wave 
returned forests to both individuals and local communities, with a 
maximum of 10 hectares for individuals.  The final wave -- which is 
still ongoing -- has no restriction on size or type of recipient. 
During the first two stages of restitution, the government did not 
require the new owners to establish a forest management plan and a 
viable control authority did not exist.  In addition, many new 
landowners, worried that the government might change its mind and 
take back the land, quickly cut and sold their trees.  With a per 
capita income of only 30 percent of the EU-15 average, poverty also 
contributes to deforestation, since access to trees means ready 
cash. 
 
¶6. The current (2005) restitution law now requires management plans, 
but the regulatory framework, although strengthened, is still 
lacking in key areas.  For example, there is no compensation 
mechanism for individuals who receive land that is located in a 
protected area where logging is prohibited.  Without compensation, 
the owner has little incentive to keep the forest in its original 
state.  Overall, critics claim that the restitution process was 
politically driven with the successive governments (both left and 
right) more interested in returning land to voters and supporters 
than establishing a well-balanced, environmentally sustainable 
process. 
 
¶7. Corruption plays a role in many of Romania's economic, political 
and social problems, and deforestation is no exception.  Forest 
inspectors and members of the Environmental Guard are poorly paid 
and vulnerable to bribery.  Although direct evidence is hard to come 
by, many observers argue that high-level corruption also contributes 
to the problem.  Not surprisingly, Romania's poorly functioning 
justice system is no protector of the forests.  Those who cut 
illegally know the chances of getting caught and punished are slim. 
According to one Ministry of Agriculture official, few if any cases 
brought to court resulted in a final sentence.  An official with the 
National Forest Administration opined that judges do not recognize 
 
BUCHAREST 00001233  002.2 OF 003 
 
 
the concept of "ecological value" and thus give out light 
punishments, such as small fines. 
 
¶8. Finally, as a relatively poor country, Romania lacks the means to 
properly manage and protect both private and state-owned forests. 
For example, this same official with the National Forest 
Administration complained that the country's 1,000 forest inspectors 
are not enough to do the job. 
 
HELPING ROMANIA FIGHT DEFORESTATION 
----------------------------------- 
¶9. The international community is well aware of Romania's 
deforestation problem and has offered assistance through a variety 
of programs.  Close donor coordination is essential in helping the 
government do a better job at protecting and managing the country's 
natural resources.  In addition, bilateral and multilateral efforts 
to support the fight against corruption, reform Romania's judicial 
system and develop its civil society all contribute to environmental 
protection, at least indirectly.  As poverty is a major factor in 
deforestation, programs aimed at developing Romania's economy in an 
environmentally and socially sustainable manner will also help 
combat the problem. 
 
¶10. Regarding specific forestry-related programs, the World Bank's 
$32 million Forest Development Project seeks to strengthen the 
administrative capacity of the regulatory authorities, develop 
national and local associations of private forest owners, 
rehabilitate the forest road network, increase the competitiveness 
of the forest industries, and build public support for sustainable 
forest management.  But protests from the NGO community have slowed 
and altered the World Bank effort.  Critics were concerned about 
corruption in the forestry sector, non-transparency, and the Bank's 
original plan to build new forest roads (the project will now only 
rehabilitate existing roads).  The $14 million Forestation of 
Degraded Agricultural Land Proto-Carbon Project is another Bank 
program.  This project envisions planting trees on almost 7,000 
hectares of state-owned degraded agricultural lowlands and then 
paying for the corresponding carbon emission reductions.  Finally, 
the World Bank and Global Environment Facility completed a $7 
million program focused on biodiversity and protected area 
management.  Forest protection was an integral part of this project, 
although a Ministry of Environment official criticized the project 
for its lackluster results. 
 
¶11. Although the European Union does not have a specific forest 
policy, its biodiversity programs naturally include forest 
protection measures.  Romania boasts large populations of European 
brown bears, wolves and lynx, among other noteworthy species. 
Preserving its virgin and natural forests is critical to supporting 
a variety of plant and animal populations.  The Ministry of 
Environment hopes future EU funds will be available to compensate 
owners for preserving their forestland or to buy back forests of 
particular ecological importance.  However, it is unclear at this 
time if EU funds will be available for such activities. 
 
¶12. Embassy Bucharest, through its Foreign Agricultural Service and 
USAID offices, has worked with local NGOs on forest protection 
programs over the last several years.  Post is currently awaiting 
delivery of a comprehensive report on deforestation and the 
restitution of forestlands to their original owners from the Center 
for Institutional Reform and the Informal Sector (IRIS) at the 
University of Maryland.  USAID, through its agribusiness program, is 
working with local communities to implement sustainable eco-tourism 
through the promotion of an "eco-tourism" certification that 
encourages sustainable forestry practices and environmental 
protection.  Post will continue to look for ways to collaborate with 
the local NGO community, including the Regional Environmental Center 
(REC), on forestry protection measures. 
 
COMMENT 
------- 
¶13. Unfortunately, Romania's deforestation problem shows no sign of 
abating.  Forests continue to be restituted without an institutional 
framework for proper protection and management.  Romania's many 
other social, economic and political challenges also contribute to 
the problem.  As one environmentalist noted, Romania has yet to 
develop a civil society that can effectively fight for the 
environment.  The outside world can help Romania protect and 
conserve its forests, but this is ultimately a job for Romanians 
themselves.  After forty years of communism, societal attitudes 
toward the environment cannot be expected to change overnight. 
 
¶14. As a next step in promoting awareness of environmental issues in 
this context, Embassy Bucharest is eager to work with EUR and G/OES 
 
BUCHAREST 00001233  003.2 OF 003 
 
 
in their efforts to present a regional environmental crime workshop 
at the International Law Enforcement Academy in Budapest.  Post also 
encourages inclusion of environmental crime in future "International 
Crime Issues" multiregional programs for international visitors. 
 
¶15.  Embassy Bucharest's reporting telegrams are available on the 
Bucharest SIPRNet website:  www.state.sgov.gov/p/eur/bucharest. 
 
TAUBMAN