How in the world can Greenpeace and WWF justify their support for heavy first time logging of the world's last ancient forests? Truly shocking.

If we cannot trust the WWF, Greeenpeace, and FSC, then whom can we trust? This information strongly suggests the need for new third party examination of all forestry stewardship programs and their participants.

I've been suspicious of Greenpeace and WWF for a long time. They both do some positive work, but sometimes they behave in ways that are hard to understand. I've stopped sending any donations to both of these organizations. There are plenty of other environmental groups with clean track records that are highly worthy of support!

In the recipient list it looks like you are targeting the Greenpeace photo and video library. Why? 106 recipients of the email? Saving forest is one thing but this is looking a lot like spam.

RESPONSE: Because this is a protest against Greenpeace's staff person chairing FSC and not doing anything about the string of terrible certifications. It is not much fun I suppose to be on the other end of a protest. Saving ancient forests is a requirement for global ecological sustainablity, not spam.
g.b.

The FSC scheme is about the best we have, unfortunately this example (if true) demonstrates the fallibility of certification schemes. Until we have international agreement and legislation to protect our forest resources we should continue to support certification schemes.

RESPONSE: The best we have? Certified loggers building huge road networks to illegally log mahogany? The best we have would be to END ANCIENT FOREST LOGGING as a requirement for global environmental sustainability.
g.b.

Its most important we criticise Greenpeace and others who are supporting logging of ancient forests. Our movement has stopped almost all logging of ancient forests in Aotearoa/New Zealand, but while it was still occuring, Greenpeace and Grant Rosoman were helping the logging company get FSC certification for its exotic plantations. We activists felt so betrayed by this - shame on Mr Rosoman, who is still using his kiwi origin and [short] activist background to help the loggers.

In repsonse to g.b. Yes the FSC scheme is the best we have. The point you make is exactly the same as mine, we need legislation to protect forests. I do not like forest certification, it is a voluntary scheme, market driven by corporations who appreciate the value of putting the FSC logo on their products.
It is naive to think otherwise. In its absence what do we have?

Are you in favour of ending ancient forest logging in sustainably managed European forests?

Is it not necessary and/or fitting to protest against the consumers, especially those in rich countries for their insatiable demand for more and more luxury goods? Are these people and their governments less responsible for the destrucion of ancient forests and the ecological system as a whole?

We all need to work together to save our beautiful planet and stop raping it!!!!

I never thought I would see the day when Greenpeace, WWF etc would be the reason given to destroy first growth Ipe trees. We have been fighting to stop our shore town, Ocean City, from using FSC "certifed" old growth Ipe to replenish our boardwalk. Lo and behold our City fathers have been banging the drum "this is supported by Greenpeace WWF....so it must be environmentally responsible". Ten years ago after 22 months of rallies, education, meetings, TV etc our City Council passed a Resolution never to use tropical hardwood again on the boardwalk. Fast forward 10 years "we are doing right by the environment by using FSC wood because Greenpeace, WWF said so..." What these major environmental groups have done is given the greedy-ones a large spiked bat with which they are beating us. So sure were 4 out of 7 members of Council that purchasing Ipe that is FSC "certified" that they voted in favor of it. So hence the major effort for all of us now to undo the damage!! There should be a national law banning the import of tropical hardwood. Viva Norway!

It's not the first time WWF Peru is directly linked with a forest company involved in illegal activities in the Peruvian Amazon Rainforest. A few years ago the Panda Bear provided funds to Maderera Pezo "to improve its sustainable forest practices" and later the illegal activities of this company were "discovered" by the media. It seems that some organizations just don't learn from their mistakes...or maybe it is just easier to turn a blind eye on a truth known by everybody except by WWF.

Is it really so surprising that WWF & Greenpeace behave this way? They seem more intressed in selling t-shirts, mugs & cuddly toys & getting more & more membership fees then standing up to the corporations that they are beginning to act like. Look at their websites & spam that they send out. WWF in particular is rolling in money (just look at where their offices are for example), but where's the action?
FSCs system has no teeth, so the Corporations can carry on as normal with the occasional slap on the wrist. Enviro-groups in Sweden too have grown tired with FSC and have begun to leave it.
More stick and less carrot is needed in my opinion.