7. Biofuel policies and their impact on local people and biodiversity: a case study from Danau Sentarum.

Yuliani, Elizabeth Linda ; Indriatmoko, Yayan ; Salim, Mohammad Agus 等

To reduce carbon emissions and mitigate climate change, some developed countries are setting targets to increase their use of biofuels. For example, the European Union is setting a target to shift 10 percent of its fuel consumption to biofuel by 2020 (European Union 2007). The increasing demand for biofuels has created opportunities in Indonesia, and both private finns and the government have been establishing new oil palm plantations all over Indonesia; the initiatives are considered Indonesia's contribution to climate change mitigation, poverty alleviation and carbon emissions reductions. In the International Conference and Exhibition on Palm Oil in Jakarta this year, the country's minister of Industry said that Indonesia's production target is 50 million tons of crude palm oil in 2020 (Kompas, 27 May 2009). The target is a more than 400 percent increase compared with the 2007 production of 11.8 million tons (http://www.bps.go.id/sector/agri/kebun/table2.shtml).

New oil palm plantations are being established with surprising speed all over the country, including in important conservation areas and forested land. In some areas, land allocated for oil palm has exceeded the target. In West Kalimantan, where the provincial target is 1.5 million ha of oil palm plantations, Idwar Hanis, head of the Provincial Plantation Service, says that permits given by heads of districts have reached 2 million ha. Surat informasi lahan (land information documents released by heads of districts) in West Kalimantan indicate an additional 2.6 million ha planned for oil palm plantations; thus far, only 427,000 ha of the total area has been planted (Kompas, 24 November 2008).

The increasing demand for biofuel has led not only to deforestation but also to a shortage of cooking oil, starting in early 2007. Cooking oil prices in local markets went up from IDR 5,000/kg (US$0.50/kg) (1) in 2006 (Ariyani 2007) to IDR 13,000-17,500/kg in 2008 (Kompas, 13 March 2008, 17 March 2008), and the price has been fluctuating in 2009. Women must queue for hours, often under the heat of the tropical sun, to buy cooking oil subsidized by the government. Chemical bleaching compounds have been added to make used cooking oil look clear so that it can be resold (Berita Kediri, 25 May 2007; Kompas, 17 March 2008).

In response, the Indonesian Minister of Industry, in a parliament meeting in April 2007, stated that the situation was caused by increasing demand and rising prices of crude palm oil on the global market. One mechanism to be implemented by the government is increasing the pungutan ekspor (export tax); however, the risks should also be assessed. Companies often pass along costs to farmers--for example, by forcing down the purchase price at the farm gate to compensate for the higher export tax (Widiyanti 2007). Growing evidence suggests that the world's increasing demand for biofuel has caused detrimental effects on the poor and people in developing countries.

Oil palm companies and district government officials talk about employment opportunities and livelihood improvements to persuade local people to convert their forests. But the true benefits of oil palm are not always so clear. (2) Some authors argue that oil palm plantations can alleviate poverty and improve local people's quality of life (e.g., Basiron 2007; World Growth 2009; Zen et al. 2006). Others report that forest-dependent people often do not become significantly better off when their forests are converted to oil palm plantations (e.g., Adiwinata 1999; Brown et al. 2005; Colchester et al. 2006; Lynch and Harwell 2002; Sirait 2009). Farmers, NGOs and scientists in East Kalimantan report that revitalization of oil palm business has trapped farmers in debt because the loan interest rates are high--between 10 and 17 percent (Kompas, 13 November 2009). Benefits from oil palm development--in terms of income, schools and other infrastructure--are accompanied by indirect negative impacts and risks, as described by Gaiser (2009).

To provide a better understanding of what is happening on the ground, we conducted a study of conservation, social dynamics and local people's livelihoods as they relate to the 18 new oil palm plantations established in and around Danau Sentarum National Park (DSNP), West Kalimantan. This paper reports what has already happened in the field and predicts potential future impact based on experience in this site, local social and biophysical characteristics, and lessons from other locations in Indonesia.

Site Description

Danan Sentarum National Park is located in Kapuas Hulu District, West Kalimantan, 700 km northeast of Pontianak and 4 km south of the Indonesia-Malaysia border. The park covers 132,000 ha and consists of interconnected seasonal lakes interspersed with swamp, peat swamp and lowland forests (Giesen and Aglionby 2000), with a 65,000 ha buffer zone. Its approximately 10,100 inhabitants comprise two ethnic groups: 2,411 Malay families, who live as fisherfolk around the lakes and rivers, and 187 Iban Dayak families, who live in the hills around the periphery as swidden farmers (Indriatmoko, this volume). Many more Iban inhabit the buffer zone and beyond.

The park's ecosystem is home for 211 species offish (Kottelat and Widjanarti 2005), 27 reptile and 143 mammal species (Jeanes and Meijaard 2000a), and 282 bird species (van Balen and Dennis 2000), including threatened and endemic species. In 1997, the park had about 2,056 Bornean orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus), or approximately 15 to 20 percent of Borneo's total orangutan population (Russon et al. 2001).

Giesen and Aglionby (2000) reported that the annual rainfall in the Park fluctuates around 3,900 mm; the surrounding hills and mountainous catchment area receive 4,500 to 6,000 mm per year. Danau Sentarum wetlands are lower than the surrounding area and form a basin, which is flooded during the rainy season. The water flows to DSNP wetlands through rivers and their tributaries from all directions. (3)

The park's hydrology functions were described by Klepper (1994). One-fourth of the volume of the peak floods of the upper Kapuas River system flows into DSNP's lakes and swamp forests. During the dry season, up to 50 percent of the upper Kapuas River water is supplied by DSNP. Thus, any large-scale development activities in the water catchment areas could have extreme effects on the ecosystem and its people.

Ambiguous policies and overlapping status of DSNP's buffer zone (4)

DSNP's buffer zone is part of the water catchment for the wetlands and performs critical regulatory services, but its boundaries have been contested ever since the area was designated as a park, in 1999. The Ministry of Forestry declared Danau Sentarum a national park by issuing a surat penunjukan (gazettement letter), the first part in a four-step process of finalizing its status. A gazettement letter should be followed by boundary marking and mapping, and the area is then legalized through a surat penetapan (letter of confirmation). (5) By mid-2009, however, boundary marking had not yet started. The DSNP management unit itself was not established until February 2007, through the Ministry of Forestry's regulation no P.03/Menhut-11/2007.

In the same year as the gazettement of DSNP, the buffer zone was granted two other statuses: as production forest, according to the regional spatial planning map (I 999), and as area peruntukan lain (area for other land uses) in the Paduserasi map (6) (1999) (Wadley et al. 2000). In 2004, secondary forest in the buffer zone was categorized as dry land agriculture, and peat swamp forest was considered wetlands agriculture by the District Land Office, according to its plantation and wetlands agricultural map.

The different statuses led to overlapping claims. A buffer zone is intended to be managed by the rights-holder of the land to minimize threats to protected areas (7); a production forest is managed centrally by the Directorate General of Forestry Production Development of the Ministry of Forestry to improve wood production. An area peruntukan lain falls under district government authority and can be allocated for development programs, and this was the basis upon which the district government granted oil palm plantation permits.

The oil palm business is not new in DSNP, but no plantation has yet flourished. For example, PT Plantana Razindo started its operation in 1996 but left after clearing the forest and selling the timber (Wadley et al. 2000). In the north, PT Rokan Group attempted to start an oil palm plantation in 1992 in the dusuns (hamlets) of Berangan and Perumbang but did not continue.

Erman (2005) and Farid (2006) reported that most local communities (75 percent) in the northern part of DSNP opposed oil palm development and reacted cynically to the plans. Companies had taken over their customary forests, including croplands, without paying any compensation, then left without fulfilling their promises to provide employment and improve well-being. When the companies left, the land could not be replanted because the fertile topsoil had been removed. Further, the people of Dusun Tangit IV in the north of DSNP reported that the company wanted to acquire only tall forest, not other lands. Local communities in Dusun Berangan, Dusun Perumbang, Dusun Seriang and Dusun Tangit IV reported that the company harvested the valuable timber and sold it in Malaysia.

In mid-2005, the Indonesian government, through the Minister of Agriculture, announced its plan to establish the world's largest oil palm plantation along the border with Malaysia in Borneo. The area along the 1,782 km border (Geographer 1965) encompasses three national parks and orangutan habitat. The plan has prompted controversy and concern worldwide because of the many examples of oil palm plantations causing more problems than benefits to local communities and conservation. On 27 October 2005 the Ministry of Agriculture responded to the concerns expressed by various international, national and local institutions, through a letter to the Ministry of Forestry and the State Department saying that only 13 percent of the border area was suitable for oil palm; the letter did not specify the suitable locations.

Nevertheless, in 2007, the Kapuas Hulu district government gave permits to as many as 18 to 21 oil pall companies, in total covering 259,500 ha (Kapuas Hulu District Forestry Service press release version) to 366,823 ha (Kapuas Hulu District Forestry Service land-use digital map). Officials of the district government mentioned in various speeches that establishment of the oil palm companies was Indonesia's contribution to climate change mitigation.

Methods for Assessing Effects

To study the effects of the establishment of 18-21 new oil palm plantations on social dynamics, power struggles, conflict and indications of illegality,

we used informal and focus group discussions, in-depth interviews and participant observation techniques. More formal techniques could not be used because of the sensitivity of the topics. Researchers strove to be seen as neutral as possible.

The biophysical effects were assessed using primary and secondary data, including in-depth interviews with local people and staff of the National Park Authority, and fire occurrence as documented by the Ministry of Forestry using real-time, fire hotspot data. The extent of forest cover and peatlands converted for oil palm was calculated using spatial analysis and field observations. We overlaid the following spatial data using ArcGIS software to identify and calculate plantation areas that overlapped with forest and peatland areas: plantation areas (Kapuas Hulu District Forestry Service 2008), land cover (Forestry Planning Agency 2002), and peatland distribution (Wahyunto and Subagjo 2004). Results are presented in Figures 2 and 3. Areas categorized as not suitable (or not allowed) for oil pall by the Ministry of Agriculture's Land Suitability Characteristics are shaded in the overlaid maps.

We then predicted the likely impacts of new plantations based on data on biophysical and social characteristics of the site, combined with reports from other locations with similar characteristics.

We calculated emissions of below-ground carbon from peatlands that are allocated for oil pall using the following equation (Wahyunto and Suryadiputra 2008) (8):

Below-ground carbon stores (KC) = B x A x D x C where:

KC = carbon store, in tons

B = bulk density (BD) of peat soil in grams per cubic centimeter (g/cc) or tons per cubic meter (t/[m.sup.3])

A = area of peat soil, in square meters ([m.sup.2])

D = peat thickness, in meters (m)

C = carbon content (C-organic), as a percentage

For the calculation, we used the average values of bulk density and carbon content, compiled by Wahyunto and Subagjo (2004) from various sources, including laboratory analysis reports by Puslitanak and WIIP in 2002-2004, and field survey reports by other parties (e.g., Bogor Agricultural Institute).

We used those values to calculate below-ground carbon stores. The results are shown in Table 2.

We assessed the potential effects on biodiversity by first identifying the conservation status of mammal and bird species as listed in the IUCN Redlist online database (http://www.iucnredlist.org/). We then looked for types of habitat needed by the species in the following categories: near threatened, vulnerable, endangered and critically endangered. Lists of mammals and important habitats were taken from Jeanes and Meijaard (2000a, 2000b), Sebastian (2000) and Russon et al. (2000), and birds from van Balen and Dennis (2000). We then overlaid the locations of important habitats with the oil palm plantation areas to identify overlaps.

We also conducted a literature review and fishermen interviews on the diet, habitat preference and tolerance to environmental conditions of each fish species and researched its migration patterns (Kottelat and Widjanarti 2005; www.fishbase.org). We evaluated land cover and the topographical and hydrological features of the areas allocated for plantations, and predicted the likely effects on fish downstream. Sources include Klepper (1994), 90M Elevation Data SRTM-NASA, Vegetation Cover of West Kalimantan, and Forestry Planning Agency-Ministry of Forestry (2002). The list of pesticides often used in oil palm plantations was taken from Pahan (2006) and Fernandez et al. (2002), and information about toxicity on fish was obtained from Extoxnetextoxnet.orst.edu/, the Pesticide Action Network database http://pesticideinfo.org/ and published articles.

We assessed the implications of oil palm plantations for local people's livelihoods in terms of health, income, availability of and access to forest products and ecosystem services, and effects on women. The assessment was made based on primary data, which were collected using in-depth interviews and participant observation techniques, and on secondary data about the location (Colfer et al. 2000; Ernawati 2006, 2007; Indriatmoko & Abas 2007; Yuliani & Erman 2005). We also conducted a literature review on pesticide toxicity to human beings and implications of oil palm plantations for women.

Results and Discussion

Our study showed that the new oil palm plantations around DSNP provide benefits for a small number of people (9) but also involve illegality, conflict, primary and secondary forest clearing, peat swamp conversion and significant changes in important ecosystem functions.

Based on our in-depth interviews, approximately 40 percent of respondents outside the DSNP boundary support oil palm plantations. Supporters include illegal loggers and others who expect cash income for handing over land rights, employment in the oil palm company and in infrastructure development, involvement in a nucleus estate program, and jobs in local businesses, such as groceries, small shops and cafes, and accommodation and car rental services. A small number (10) of community members are employed as security guards, do "public relations" involving communication and negotiation with local people, and work as land brokers. One company provides free health services and has occasionally sent a mobile clinic to villages in the southern buffer zone. Inside the park, however, where communities are dependent on fishing, there is no apparent support for the plantations. People express concern about pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers and siltation from oil palm plantations. They know that chemical compounds used to preserve wood have often killed fish, and chemical poisons have been used to catch fish. They are also worried that the wetlands will dry up, and they have observed abrupt fluctuations in the water level since the catchment area was cleared for the plantations.

To minimize negative consequences and to maximize benefits for local communities, policies and regulations have been developed. An association to ensure sustainable palm oil, the Roundtable for Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO), (11) has also been formed. Nevertheless, our study shows that such mechanisms have not been particularly effective. We identified several underlying problems: tricks, used by oknum (brokers) to give an impression that regulations and certification mechanisms are being followed; lack of law enforcement; ambiguous and inconsistent policies; and conflict both between communities and between the communities and the government. These problems and the negative environmental effects are described in the following sections.

Trickery

We found many tricks being used by companies and their local brokers to circumvent the required procedures. For example, companies planning to open plantations on land categorized as forest (12) are required to obtain forest conversion permits (13), wood utilization permits (14) and heavy equipment permits (15) (see Figure 1). However, the company in Suhaid subdistrict sent loggers from other districts in April 2008 to cut big trees in the targeted locations, including in community protection forest. The loss of big trees changed the status of the land from forest to nonforest The company was therefore not required to obtain the permits.

That case also provides evidence of a lack of law enforcement. Having tried but failed to stop the loggers from cutting the big trees, the local community then reported the activities to the police and district government; no action ensued. Several weeks later, a contractor company came "to clean the area" and haul off "the unused plant material"--the company's wording for the big logs. NGOs and communities surmised that the company had killed two birds with one stone: it both made the land available for oil palm and profited from the sale of the logs. The government said that the contractor did not have any permits to transport big logs, and they would report it to the head of the district, but no action was taken.

The logging changed the condition of the forest. If assessed before the trees were cut, it could have been considered a high conservation value forest because it provided clean water and other resources for local people. Some areas were considered sacred by local people. Once the big trees had been cut, the ecosystem no longer qualified as a high conservation value forest. As a result, the company can argue that it never ignored its obligations as an RSPO member. (16)

Other cases involve strategies to get customary leaders' approval to hand over rights to land. Based on Act No. 18/2004, companies must discuss land transfers and compensation with the holders of customary rights (collectively and as individuals). To comply with this regulation, some companies have given special treatment to people originally opposed to their activities--employing former opponents as negotiators or security guards, providing them with free health services, and giving them trips around the country to visit other oil palm areas. By such means, the companies have been able to convert opponents into proponents, despite the visible evidence of adverse effects of oil palm establishment in the area. When "participatory" meetings were held, only these converted proponents were invited.

During a field trip in mid-2008, we witnessed a grieving family whose land was being cleared for an oil palm plantation. The father had initially refused to allow his land to be converted to an oil palm plantation, but the night before, he had gotten drunk and unwittingly signed the agreement to hand over the land to the company. He suspected that the "friend" who took him drinking was paid by the company to do so.

By such trickery, companies have gotten customary rights holders' approval, as required by law, and companies that are members of RSPO have met their obligations on "participation." (17)

The tricks have also caused a snowball effect and speeded up land clearing. Communities whose lands will be taken over by another party have the right to receive cash compensation. This has motivated opportunists to claim land in order to get the compensation by clearing an area as large as possible or marking new boundaries. Others, including former opponents of oil palm development, follow suit for many reasons: they are tempted by higher compensation, have no choice, or fear being coerced. Arowana fish farmers in particular are among the strongest opponents but many are afraid to say so because their fish breeding ponds can easily be poisoned, and a valuable community business can be killed within seconds.

Our findings suggest that the tricks, manipulation, collusion and intimidation commonly used during the New Order era (Colchester et al. 2006; Lynch & Harwell 2002; Potter & Lee 1998) are still employed, even though reform began a decade ago.

Lack of Law Enforcement

Our study shows that laws and regulations have become a "toothless tiger": they exist but are not enforced and therefore not respected. In two subdistricts, Suhaid and Selimbau, companies marked boundaries for oil palm in customary forests without giving notice to the local communities.

The Indonesian government has a very complex series of steps to get permits (see Figure 1) and local communities' approval. We found, however, that from July 2007 to September 2008, without having obtained any permits, there were companies clearing more than 1,000 ha of land in each subdistrict. A company could only establish a nursery and start planting if they hold Land Cultivation Rights (HGU or Hak Guna Usaha). However, the same group of companies started those activities without HGU. One of the companies had only a 'land information document' (surat informasi laban) (18), and another company a 'Plantation Permit' (IUP or Ijin Usaha Perkebunan) (19) (see also Figure 1). The land information document and Plantation Permit are only two of many other documents required to apply for the permit to start a nursery and to plant. This indicates violations of Act No. 5/1960, Government Regulation No.40/1996, Forestry Ministerial Decree No. 382/Menhut-II/2004 and Forestry Ministerial Regulations No. 55/2006, No. E54/Menhut-II/2007 and No. E4/Menhut-II/2008.

[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]

Those violations were reported to the local police office, district government and district legislative assembly (Community of Suhaid 2007a), district forestry service and provincial environmental agency. The report was followed by a brief investigation by the provincial government. As of mid-2009, discussions among the provincial environmental agency, NGOs and district government on this issue were continuing. Despite a series of law violations, WALHI (2009) reported the planting was even launched officially by the district government, and the companies continued clearing and planting the land.

In other cases, the law has been enforced only against local people, who are in a comparatively weak position. For example, a community member who cut trees in a protected area forest was arrested in Sintang; at the same time, a company and its supporters claimed the protected forest as their land and cut trees with impunity.

The government has also broken its own laws. (20) Some companies were granted plantation permits by the district government before completing an environmental impact assessment (EIA) and without communities' approval on the land transfer. Clashes between the company and local people occurred when the company started land clearing. The case was reported to the provincial government, but the Provincial EIA Commission refused to have further discussions because land clearing had started (Coalition for Danau Sentarum Redemption 2009).

Ambiguous and Inconsistent Policies

Lack of clear policy and regulations has led to overlapping claims and contributed to the exploitation and conversion of the DSNP buffer zone. Six companies are located in the park's buffer zone (Figure 2).

Figure l (facing page). Plantation permitting procedures in forested APL (APL = other land uses) for plantation operational activities. If the area is nonforest, the procedure is shorter (bottom side, marked by dash). Many companies trick people by paying a group to cut trees in the targeted location, have it formally categorized as a nonforest area thereby reducing the lengthy procedures. Diagram by E. Linda Yuliani and Mumn Muhajir.

[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]

At the district level, policies are inconsistent. In many cases, habitat conservation and ecosystem functions are rarely considered in decision making and land-use planning. The inappropriate issue of some plantation permits shows that the control mechanism--an environmental impact assessment--is not working. The agency responsible for reviewing EIAs is the District Environmental Impact Management Agency. (21) The agency reports to the district head, who has the authority to release the plantation permit, and thus cannot easily oppose the granting of a permit.

In one example of inconsistent policy, the head of the district declared Kapuas Hulu a conservation district in October 2003, (22) yet no conservation program has been developed. Instead, large-scale development programs driven by big investors have dominated decisions and land-use plans in the district. The head of the district also declared Suhaid and Semitau subdistricts as the center of arowana breeding farms, (23) but instead of developing programs to support them, he granted a permit for a company whose location includes a community-protected lake that has supplied water to the arowana breeding farms.

We found inconsistent policies and programs at the national level and between levels as well. The Minister of Forestry made a public statement asking the head of the district to withdraw the permits of 12 oil palm plantations whose locations overlapped the national park boundaries (24) (Sinar Harapan 2008), but there has been no follow-up from either the district or the Ministry of Forestry.

Conflict

The establishment of oil palm concessions around DSNP has triggered conflict at all stages of palm oil plantation development. Conflicts occur between groups within the community, between neighboring villages, between the pro and con factions within the district government, and between communities and the government.

For example, one community member who tried to stop land clearing was beaten by company supporters. Two neighboring villages in northern DSNP, Jelawat and Seluang, (25) have also been in conflict. Seluang favored oil palm development and reached an agreement on compensation and benefit sharing, followed by boundary marking and land clearing by the company. However, Jelawat, which strongly opposed this development because of experiences with fake oil palm companies, found that part of the oil palm area falls within the village. The people of Jelawat confiscated the equipment and reported the encroachment to the police, but the people of Seluang and the government accused them of being jealous and trying to get compensation. Tension between the two villages escalated. There is now an interesting dynamic and trade-off, however, between the two villages: Seluang, which supported the conversion of its customary forest to oil palm, then lost its supply of clean water and must now buy water from Jelawat.

Conflict among communities is triggered mainly by different perceptions and expectations of oil palm. Based on our interviews with those who live outside the park boundary, up to 60 percent strongly oppose the development of oil palm because of their experience with its associated illegalities and rights violations. Meanwhile, all respondents who live on the lake object to oil palm because they anticipate that pesticides, fertilizers and erosion will pollute the water and kill the fish, water levels will drop as a result of peat swamp forest and forest conversion, and people from outside the park will begin to use natural resources inside the park.

Some anecdotal information (26) suggests that the district government has become divided into at least three groups: supporters of oil palm, such as the head of the district and his followers; opponents, led by the deputy; and those who do not want to reveal their opinion. In early 2009, there were some efforts to disempower the opponents by transferring them to less important offices or by liquidating their divisions.

Conflicts also occur between the communities, on the one hand, and the district government and companies, on the other. In many cases, reports of such conflicts were characterized by company officials as instances of opponents who were "jealous" or "trying to gain more compensation"--assertions made to cover the violations of the companies. This type of conflict is now being investigated by Indriatmoko and Yasmi.

[FIGURE 3 OMITTED]

Conversion of Forest and Peatlands

Land conversion around the park has been made easier by the classification of secondary forests and peat swamp forests as area peruntukan lain (area for other land uses) and nonforest. Our study shows that 38.52 percent of plantation areas, or 141,290 ha, are located in primary dry land forest, primary swamp forest, secondary dry land forest and secondary swamp forest (Table 2, Figure 2). In particular, 22.8 percent of the plantation areas, or 83,670 ha, are in swamp forests.

The areas outside the DSNP boundary in the west, north, and east are swampy, and have a high water table (Farid 2006) and therefore are not suitable for oil palm. These areas were allocated to four oil palm companies, which have begun clearing the land and draining the swamps without regard for hydrological and other ecosystem functions. The companies, all RSPO members, have not worked effectively toward certified production of sustainable palm oil. (27)

Twelve plantation companies occupy 96,519 ha of peatland, with peat that ranges from shallow and thin, to moderate, to very deep and very thick (Figure 3). That permits were granted for these areas indicates the government's lack of attention to the importance ofpeatlands. Tropical peatlands make a significant contribution to terrestrial carbon storage because of their considerable thickness, high carbon content and, most importantly, their rapid peat and carbon accumulation rates, which have often exceeded those of boreal and temperate peatlands (Immirzi and Maltby 1992 in Page et al. 2004; see also Anshari, this volume).

Eleven companies occupy major river and water catchment areas, and 13 companies are located on areas that have slopes of more than 8 percent (Figure 4), even though steep slopes are unsuitable for oil palm because of erosion and consequent low soil fertility (Ministry of Agriculture 1997). Moreover, plantation road networks require leveling of steep slopes, which could cause erosion and siltation to DSNP waterbodies. Techniques to minimize the environmental effects are unlikely to be implemented by the companies, given the lax law enforcement in the area. Ecological consequences aside, the conversion of peatland, water catchments, and steep slopes for large-scale development clearly violates the law. (26)

Loss of Biodiversity Habitat

Forests in and around DSNP, including those allocated for oil palm, have been home to endemic and protected species, such as orangutans and proboscis monkeys (Nasalis larvatus), and the swamps are breeding sites for fish, amphibians and reptiles. Some companies have started clearing land, draining the swamps, leveling slopes and building roads, with adverse effects on wildlife habitats and breeding refugees. (29)

One of the threatened reptile species is Tomistoma schegelii, a rare crocodile whose main habitat in the northern part of DSNP (Gernis, Danau Siawan and Sungai Air Merah; Suriansyah 2006)has been cleared for an oil palm plantation. Communities along the Leboyan River have reported increased sightings of crocodiles, perhaps because of loss of habitat upstream due to land clearing and road construction from Lanjak to Bunut, and they fear attacks on humans.

Fire

Between 1 June and 18 August 2009, we recorded 155 fire hotspots in the oil palm sites. The company said the fires were used by local people to clear land for planting crops. This seems unlikely because the area had been taken over and cleared by oil palm concessions, and the people had no need to clear the land and would have no expectation of raising crops.

Future Consequences

We assess the likely outcomes based on what has happened, as described in previous sections, combined with the social and biophysical characteristics of DSNP and its surrounding area and reports about oil palm plantations from other locations in Indonesia. What has happened in DSNP indicates inadequate attention to issues of social responsibility and good local governance.

Manipulative practices, illegal activities, social injustice, lack of law enforcement, inconsistent policies and vertical and horizontal conflict have been associated with oil palm development all over Indonesia. Local communities have lost their forests (and thus their source of food, income, and other services) from "logging disguised as oil palm plantations" (30) (Brown et al. 2005; Colchester et al. 2006; Lynch and Harwell 2002; Malinau Participatory Mapping Facilitator Team 2000; Potter and Lee 1998; Rhee 2003; Wulan et al. 2004; National Commission of Human Rights and the Environmental Ministry in Jakarta Post, 19 May 2009). We predict that these problems will continue. Mechanisms, regulations, and techniques to minimize negative social and environmental impact are unlikely to be implemented. The likely consequences are described in the following sections.

[FIGURE 4 OMITTED]

Carbon Emissions

There are twelve plantation companies that occupy 96,519 ha of peatland, a major carbon sink (Hooijer et al. 2006; Page et al. 2004). Drainage of peat leads to aeration of the peat material and then to oxidation, resulting in C[O.sub.2] gas emissions to the atmosphere (Hooijer et al. 2006). Conversion of 96,519 ha of peatland into other land uses will release into the atmosphere approximately 128 million tons of below-ground carbon. This calculation does not yet include the above-ground carbon stores and uptake by vegetation. If the above-ground carbon stores and carbon uptake by vegetation are included, carbon emissions caused by conversion for oil palm will be still higher.

Fish diversity (31)

Fish diversity and populations are likely to significantly decrease because of water pollution and loss of refuges and breeding sites caused by conversion of peat swamp forests, forest streams and creeks. Figure 4 shows the location of plantations within DSNP's water catchment area. Sediments and pollutants caused by project activities in these areas are likely to be carried by the rivers and tributaries and affect aquatic organisms. (32) Water bodies around intensive agriculture and large-scale plantations often have high levels of turbidity (Brown et al. 2005; Rachmatika et al. 2005), chemical pollutants (residues of pesticides and fertilizer) and organic pollutants comprising palm oil mill effluent and decomposition of empty fruit bunches. Oil palm plantations generally require one mill for every 3,885 to 5,180 ha of area, and each mill produces 20,000 tons of empty fruit bunches and 50 [m.sup.3] of palm oil mill effluent per day (Suhaimi and Ong 2001). Given that the total plantation area around DSNP is approximately 366,820 ha, 71 to 94 mills can be expected to be built in the area, producing a total of 1.4 million to 1.9 million tons of fruit bunches and 3,500 to 4,700 [m.sup.3] of effluent each day.

Such pollutants could kill aquatic organisms through direct and indirect mechanisms. The mixture of more than one pollutant could lead to higher toxicity (Lloyd 1987). Some pesticides are extremely toxic and could directly kill fish or their larvae, inhibit fish reproduction, and reduce aquatic organisms that are important food for fish (Paul and Sinnott 2000; EJF 2002; Johnson and Finley 1980; Koesoemadinata and Djajadiredja 1976). Suspended sediment can adhere to gill tissue and lead to respiration difficulties, with subsequent gill abrasion leading to pathogenic penetration (Rachmatika et al. 2005) and higher fish egg mortality. High turbidity and suspended sediments will reduce light penetration into the water and subsequently reduce primary production of phytoplankton (the first level in the food chain) and thus affect fish breeding or growing. Low photosynthesis rates coupled with high levels of organic pollutants will significantly decrease dissolved oxygen content. The availability of oxygen solubility in water and fish oxygen demand also relate to temperature. The higher the air and water temperature caused by land clearing, (33) the more oxygen solubility decreases, while fish metabolism and oxygen demand increase (Ficke et al. 2005).

As a result, the species that require clear water and high oxygen content are not likely to survive. Among the 211 fish species found in DSNP (Kottelat & Widjanarti

2005) are at least 104 species that fall in this category (Figure 5), including fish with high economic value like freshwater stingray (Himantura signifer), Asian bonytongue fish (Scleropagesformosus), giant featherback (Chitala hypselonotus) and tapah catfish (Wallago leeri). (34) Of the remaining species, 42 thrive in muddy water with low oxygen and are most likely to survive, and we lack data on habitat preference for 65 species.

Terrestrial Biodiversity

Oil palm establishment is likely to adversely affect terrestrial wildlife through loss of habitat, hunting by company workers, poaching, illegal trading, pollution, fire, and conflict with humans. Peat swamp and hill forests in in and around DSNP constitute important refuges for a variety of wildlife during the annual nine- to 10-month flooding of the lake basin (Jeanes and Meijaard 2000b). Clearing such areas for plantations will certainly cause loss of habitat. Moreover, we expect consumption of orangutans by company workers, poaching, and illegal trade (Heri et al., this volume) and the use of fire and pesticides. The arrival of hundreds of employees likely to add pressure to the ecosystem (see Indriatmoko, this volume) and, coupled with lack of law enforcement, increase poaching and illegal trading.

Those threats are likely to reduce the population of wildlife in and around the park, where at least 12 species of reptiles, 78 species of birds and 44 species of mammals are listed as threatened by IUCN (Table 3 and Appendixes 1 and 2). Significant declines in numbers of orangutans have followed oil palm development elsewhere. For instance, the people of Telawan district, Central Kalimantan, used to find orangutans everywhere, but now, spotting one a year is exceptional (Jakarta Post, 19 May 2009).

Conflict between wildlife and humans is also commonly associated with oil palm development, when conversion of forest for large-scale plantations pushes animals into surrounding areas. Villages located near oil palm plantations have reported a significant increase of pests, such as rats, wild pigs, and locusts. Animals that come into conflict with humans are more frequently killed (e.g., Kornpas, 11 June 2009; Brown et al. 2005).

Local People's Well-Being

The operations of large-scale plantations surrounding DSNP may affect the health of local people through water, air, and soil pollution and reduced availability of medicinal plants and sources of nutrition. Released into DSNP wetlands, mill wastes, contaminated sediments and pesticide and fertilizer residues can seriously affect the health of local communities who use lake and river water for drinking, cooking, washing and bathing, and consume fish from the lakes and river networks. (35)

Pesticide residues used by plantations contaminate water, soil and air and reach nontarget organisms (including humans) through several routes--drift, volatilization, leaching and runoff (Silver and Riley 2001 ).The danger of pesticides to human health is well understood by the companies and the government, but no effective actions have been taken to reduce contamination. Companies have even told some workers that they are using safe pesticides and safe procedures, even though there are no truly safe pesticides (Quijano & Rengam, no date). Various authors (e.g., Fernandez et al. 2002; Ishii-Eiteman & Ardhianie 2002; Kelana & Larasati 2007; Quijano & Rengam, no date) have reported that pesticide accumulation is found in plantation workers, farmers and those who live very close to plantations or intensive agricultural lands.

We were unable to obtain data from the companies regarding their pesticide use. Therefore, we refer to lists of pesticides recommended and commonly used for oil palm (Pahan 2006; Fernandez et al. 2002). We found that among 23 active ingredients of the pesticides, 17 are categorized as moderately, highly, or very highly toxic. Such residues can contaminate people directly, through water and air, or through bioaccumulation, which may occur following consumption of animals contaminated by pesticides. DSNP has at least 134 fish species (105 carnivorous and 29 omnivorous) that are very likely to contain high levels of pesticide residues because of bioaccumulation and could pass them along the food chain, including to humans as the top predators (Figure 6).

Effects on humans vary, depending on the pesticide's active ingredients and combination of compounds, and on the duration and volume of exposure. Some of the common symptoms of pesticide contamination include skin and eye irritation, mucosal and gastrointestinal irritation, hypotension, pulmonary dysfunction, central nervous system disorders, vomiting, diarrhea, breathing difficulties, convulsions, loss of consciousness and disorders of the cardiovascular and respiratory systems. In extreme cases, severe congenital deformities, birth defects, cancer, permanent neurological impairment and death have also been reported (EJF 2002; Extoxnet 2008; Fernandez et al. 2002; National Pesticide Information Center 2000; Saenong and Hipi 2005; Quijano and Rengam, no date; WHOPES 2008).

Water polluted by organic mill waste has high turbidity and viscosity and smells bad, and is thus unsuitable for daily human use. Frequent reports of human health problems and mass fish deaths associated with effluent from palm oil mills upstream in various places in Indonesia have been made by local communities, NGOs, the government's environmental agency, and universities. The government has warned 20 companies in Riau Province to improve their waste treatment system (Jakarta Post, 9 June 2003); nevertheless, similar accidents have occurred frequently (Riau online, 11 January 2005, 4 October 2006). Released untreated, mill wastes remain dangerous pollutants, despite their many potential uses if recycled (e.g., Schuchardt et al. 2007), per RSPO standards and government regulations.

Indonesia has regulations on pesticides and pollutants, but law enforcement is weak, and violations are rarely punished. In addition, regulations are still ambiguous and allow the use of dangerous pesticides. Endosulfan, one of the most dangerous, is still categorized as for "restricted use" (Usha and Harikrishnan 2005), which implies that use is still allowed. We predict that pesticides and pollutants will contaminate the DSNP area and cause health problems for the people who depend on the wetlands.

The health of local people could also be affected by air pollution caused by fire for land clearing. The worst forest and land fires in Indonesia were recorded in 199798 and 2006, causing severe haze in Singapore, Malaysia, Brunei Darussalam, and Indonesia itself. The air pollution index in Sarawak reached 849 in September 1997 and 1000 in East Kalimantan in April 1998 (Schweithelm 1998). (36) Approximately 12.5 million people were exposed to hazardous pollution levels in the 1997-98 fires, including 527 persons who reportedly died from respiratory complications (UNDP 1998). In 2006, air pollution index readings in Sarawak were 106-188, in the Malay Peninsula 101-116, and in Singapore 81-130 (37) (AFP/ir 2006).

Most fire hotspots occur within oil palm areas. According to Eyes on the Forest (2005), 41.2 to 49.7 percent of fire hotspots in Riau were in industrial plantation areas. The Ministry of the Environment stated that 80 percent of forest and land fires in 1997 began from land clearing for plantation and transmigration schemes (Siscawati 2001). Although oil palm companies are not allowed to use fire, according to government regulations, fire is still being used for land clearing because it is cheaper than mechanical means, and law enforcement is weak. During the 1997 forest fires, 80 percent of the companies accused of practicing careless forest burning were oil palm companies (Potter and Lee 1998; Wakker 1998). Applegate et al. (2001) reported that during large-scale intentional burning of forestland to create plantations of coffee and oil palm, many fires escaped into adjacent open-access forests or timber plantation areas. Frequent reports, coupled with our fire hotspot data for the oil palm areas around DSNP, show that more fires are very likely and may affect local people's health.

Local people's health around DSNP could also decline because their food and medicinal plants disappear following conversion of forest and community gardens to oil palm. Residents of the southern part of DSNP have better access to food shops, but elsewhere, local people depend on food and medicinal plants from forests and gardens. Data presented by Colfer et al. (2000), Yuliani and Erman (2005) and Wadley and Colfer (2004) reveal that they use at least 89 plant species and 114 wild animal species (excluding fish) for food, and a household questionnaire by Yuliani and Erman (2005) on resource use in DSNP shows at least 15 medicinal plant species being used by the people, although this is likely a low figure. Although establishment of large-scale projects in the area may be accompanied by grocery shops, the people's incomes may not be enough to buy food.

Incomes

Local people's main sources of income are fish, wild-bee honey (from Apis dorsata), rubber and wood (Figure 7). Income from inland fisheries (traditional and cage culture) totals IDR 34.75 billion 0dS$ 3.5 million) per year (Indriatmoko, this volume), and the arowana breeding farms in Suhaid and Selimbau subdistricts provide net cash incomes of approximately IDR 70 billion to 140 billion (US$ 7 million to $14 million) per year. (38) Water pollution will put one of the local people's crucial income sources at risk.

In 2007, honey produced by DSNP's wild-bee farmer association (Asosiasi Periau Danau Sentarum, APDS) received organic certification, which increased the price by 80 percent, from IDR 25,000 to IDR 45,000 per kilogram--the highest in Indonesia. The production capacity of the association could reach 20 tons per year, resulting in an annual income of IDR 900 million (US$ 90,000), not including honey production by association non-members.

Large-scale plantations around DSNP are likely to reduce wild bee populations, however, because pesticides kill bees both directly (Paul & Sinnott 2000) and indirectly, when bees consume pollen and nectar contaminated by systemic pesticides (Rortais et al. 2005). In addition, pesticide contamination will cause the APDS producers to lose their organic certification and its price premium. Bees use 17 plant species in and around DSNP for nesting and breeding (Firmansyah 1996), in addition to plants that are food sources. Conversion of forest for large-scale plantations will remove those plant species, thus reducing wild bee populations (Heri et al., this volume).

Access to Forest Products and Ecosystem Services

People in and around DSNP meet their daily needs with products that come from the forest. Besides clean water and the food and medicinal plants mentioned above, the forest also provides wood for making houses, boats, planks for wild bee-keeping and other domestic uses. Colfer et al. (2000) and Yuliani and Erman (2005) have found 48 species used for those purposes. Rivers in two villages have provided energy for microhydro power (Minarchek and Indriatmoko, this volume), and more micro-hydro power dams are being planned and built.

Establishment of large-scale plantations will clear the forest and alter hydrological regimes. Local people's remaining sources of food and wood will be the tall swamp forests and hill forests inside DSNP itself. This will increase pressure on the forests within the DSNP boundary, as has happened in some other Indonesian protected areas (e.g., Gunung Palung National Park; Curran et al. 2004) and could lead to resource competition and conflict between people from outside and those who live inside the protected areas.

Women

The effects of large-scale projects on rural women are often ignored

in decision making because the impacts are rarely understood by decision makers, and sometimes even by the women themselves. We look at lessons from other locations to assess what could happen in DSNP.

The most common kinds of gender inequity following the establishment of oil palm plantations involve prostitution, health problems, wage inequalities, and reduced access to resources. Prostitution involves both locals and women from outside the area. Prostitution has sometimes become the norm on plantations by design, not simply by chance (Enloe 1989). Colfer (1995) reported that company personnel in East Kalimantan considered it necessary to support prostitution. Women and girls are recruited by traffickers using deception, flattery, and promises of pleasure and luxury. Young women from rural areas may be offered jobs as plantation workers, waitresses, hotel employees, or entertainment workers in distant places (Suci 2006), jobs that turn out to be prostitution.

Women laborers are typically paid lower rates than men (DTE 2007). They often have few choices beyond prostitution to support their families, pay debts to the companies and make up for losing their land and traditional forest-based income. Some women who married company workers are left to raise their children alone.

Women are typically a family's collectors of forest foods and water for daily consumption. When forests and gardens have been converted into plantations, and rivers are contaminated by pesticides and siltation, women are likely to have to walk or paddle several kilometers farther to find clean water and food (Malinau Participatory Mapping Facilitator Team 2000; DTE 2007).

Women who work on the plantations are employed mostly for spraying pesticides, weeding, applying chemical fertilizer, and collecting fallen fruits (Potter and Lee 1998), tasks that directly and indirectly expose them to contaminants (Fernandez et al. 2002). Kelana and Larasati (2007) reported that the breast milk of women living near plantations and intensive agricultural areas is also contaminated by pesticides. Health problems are reported by women who carry heavy baskets of fruit on their backs to the roadside collection points (Potter & Lee 1998). Many complain of back pain and lower abdominal problems, thought to be caused by carrying heavy loads (Siscawati, pers. commun.).

Conclusion and Recommendations

Global biofuel policies have had unintended consequences. The intent is to reduce carbon emissions to the atmosphere, but calls to increase the use of biofuels have been used to justify expansion of palm oil plantations, whose establishment is likely to increase carbon emissions from peatland conversion and land clearing. The violations and inconsistencies shown by the companies and district government in the area around DSNP are strong evidence that companies will not meet their promises, nor employ procedures to minimize negative environmental and social impacts. Laws and regulations have been ignored without appropriate sanctions, opponents have been tricked or arrested, and the government has rarely stood up for local communities. Companies have been able to continue their activities with little interference, even while under investigation. Certification mechanisms such as RSPO criteria and indicators have proven ineffective. According to Indonesia's leading environmental economist Emil Salim, in a scientific discussion on 'The Civilization of the Indonesian', the government at all levels is implementing etika ekonomi pasar (market economic ethics)--that is, behavior to maximize benefits and therefore power--while the environment is being commercialized and natural resources are capitalized and treated as objects to be exploited by humans, without consideration of other values.

Under those conditions, large-scale plantation development is therefore likely to reduce biodiversity, harm local communities and incomes, cause deforestation and loss of wildlife habitat, alter environmental services such as hydrological functions and carbon sequestration, destroy cultural and heritage sites, be disadvantageous to women and cause conflict between local communities and between them and outsiders. The damage and losses are likely to be irreversible and irreplaceable by any amount of income from the oil palm business.

Specifically, establishment of oil palm plantations around DSNP will have the following negative consequences:

* conversion of 141,290 ha of forest into monoculture plantation;

* degradation and draining of 96,519 ha of peatland, which will slowly release approximately 128 million tons of below-ground carbon into the atmosphere;

* local extinction of 134 threatened species (12 reptile species, 78 bird species and 11 mammal species);

* local extinction of 104 fish species (both threatened and nonthreatened), including fish with a high commercial value;

* loss of cash income of local communities, estimated at IDR 114 billion to 184 billion (US$11.4 million to $18.4 million) per year; and

* generation of 1.4 million to 1.9 million tons of empty fruit bunches and 3,500 to 4,700 [m.sub.3] of palm oil mill effluent per day.

The private sector and the government often argue that plantations will improve local livelihoods, and indeed, there have been some improvements in certain locations. In some cases, high levels of negotiation and other technical skills have allowed local people to benefit (Malinau Participatory Mapping Facilitator Team 2000; Surma 2007). The benefits, however, are often accompanied by negative environmental and social impacts of which local people were often unaware beforehand (Gaiser 2009).

Moreover, small holders and local workers deriving their livelihoods from oil palm companies are vulnerable to price fluctuations on the global market. As reported by Khudori (2008), the price of crude palm oil declined from US$1,300 per ton in March 2008 to $400 in November 2008, following the global economic crisis. Companies cut their price for fresh fruit bunches from IDR 1,500 to IDR 200-300 per kilogram and reduced the number of local workers. Dependence on the oil palm business can put local people at high risk, leaving them vulnerable to the dynamics of the global economic and political situation, and they can no longer return to subsistence farming and forest gathering on lands and forests that they have ceded to companies.

Based on lessons from Sumatra, Kalimantan and Sulawesi (Adiwinata 1999; Colchester et al. 2006; Gaiser 2009; Malinau Participatory Mapping Facilitator Team 2000; Rhee 2003; Potter & Lee 1998; Surma 2007), we conclude that livelihood improvements from oil palm (or other tree plantation) development can be expected only under the following conditions: clear agreements among local people, the company and the government; strong law enforcement; consistent and clear regulations; honest officials who protect the rights of local communities; and local people who have sufficient knowledge and negotiation skills to participate effectively in decision making.

Using biofuel to reduce carbon emissions may be less effective than planting trees and maintaining forest cover. Advocates of biofuel development projects should carefully consider the implications for marginalized groups, including the poor in developing countries.

In addition, we recommend the following:

* Allocate DSNP's surrounding areas for conservation development programs based on local natural resources, such as arowana breeding farms, cultural tourism and ecotourism, traditional fisheries and micro-hydro power.

* The Ministry of Forestry should complete procedures to get the final step in park legalization (suratpenetapan, 'letter of confirmation'), including boundary marking of the buffer zone. Boundary marking is a sensitive issue and therefore should incorporate customary forest and/or traditional zoning systems to get local people's support and collaboration.

* National and regional land-use planning agencies should protect areas that have significant environmental services for the benefit of local communities. If such locations have been allocated for oil pall or other development programs, the activities should be immediately stopped and those who have broken the laws or contravened the regulations should be sanctioned.

* Domestic and international banks and investors should not invest in businesses that are likely to have detrimental effects on local communities, biodiversity and conservation areas.

* Developed countries should not import biofuel, including palm oil, that has caused deforestation. Instead, they should encourage efforts to maintain forest cover and appropriately reward those who have retained their forests in the forms that can support long-term benefits.

* Provide training for industry and government personnel on participatory and bottom-up processes, including facilitation skills.

* Encourage collective action among local communities to strengthen local law enforcement.

* Involve women and other marginalized groups in decision making and planning processes.

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to thank the donors, Ford Foundation and the EU-funded Gemconbio project for their funding support, and our home institutions, CIFOR and Riak Bumi Foundation. Nevertheless, the views expressed in this article remain our personal views and do not necessarily reflect either the donors' or our home institutions' views. We also thank the local communities in and around DSNP, the Ministry of Forestry, Danau Sentarum National Park Authority, Kapuas Hulu District Government, Titian Foundation, WWF, WALHI, Sawit Watch, Coalition for Danau Sentarum Redemption, Carol J. Pierce Colfer, Moira Molino, Terry Sunderland, Bruce Campbell, Doris Capistrano, Bagus Hargo Utomo, Fitri Heryani, Rahayu Koesnadi, Dina Hubudin, Charlotte Soeria, Titin Suhartini, Suci Ningsih, Hari Sukmara, Yuyun Kurniawan, Irawan Sihombing, Arie Munir, Rudi Sapariza, Jefry Saragih, Shaban Setiawan, Seselia Ernawati, Zul MS, and all anonymous reviewers of this article. We also thank Sally Atwater as our excellent technical editor.

References

Adiwinata, A.S. 1999 Insights for More Responsible Palm Oil Expansion in Indonesia: Looking at the Forest Benefits for Forest Dependent People. Research project. Canberra: National Center for Development Studies, the Australian National University.

AFP/ir 2006 Haze from Indonesia Fires Chokes Region, Spreads across Pacific. Asia Pacific News, 5 October.

Applegate, G., U. Chokkalingam and Suyanto 2001 The Underlying Causes and Impacts of Fires in South-East Asia. Bogor: CIFOR-ICRAF.

Ariyani, R.R. 2007 Harga Minyak Goreng Masih Tinggi (Cooking Oil Price Stays High). Tempo Interaktif. 20 May. Available from http://www.tempointeraktif.com/ hg/ekbis/2007/07/11/brk,2007071l-103496 id.html. Basiron, Y.

2007 Palm Oil Production through Sustainable Plantations. European Journal of Lipid Science and Technology 109:289-295.

Berita Kediri 2009 Minyak Goreng Bekas Marak Diperjualbelikan di Kediri (Used Cooking Oil Is Sold in Kediri). Berita Kediri, WordPress 25 May [cited 19 May 2009]. Available from http://beritakediri.wordpress.com/2007/05/25/awas-minyak-kgoreng-bekas-dijual- di-kediri/.

Brown, E., M.F. Jacobson, and E. Wakker 2005 Cruel Oil: How Palm Oil Harms Health, Rainforest & Wildlife. Washington, D.C.: Center for Science in the Public Interest.

Coalition for Danau Sentarum Redemption 2009 Report from the Coalition for Danau Sentarum Redemption. Pontianak: The Indonesian Forum for the Environment.

Colchester, M., N. Jiwan, Andiko, M. Sirait, A.Y. Firdaus, A. Surambo, and H. Pane 2006 Promised Land: Palm Oil and Land Acquisition in Indonesia- Implications for Local Communities and Indigenous Peoples. Moreton-in-March and Bogor: Forest Peoples Programme (FPP) and Sawit Watch.

Colfer, C.J.P. 1995 Who Counts Most in Sustainable Forest Management? Working Paper No. 7. Bogor: CIFOR.

Colfer, C.J.P., A. Salim, R.L. Wadley and R.G. Dudley 2000 Understanding Patterns of Resource Use and Consumption: A Prelude to Co-Management. Borneo Research Bulletin 31:29-88.

Community of Suhaid 2007a Surat Pelaporan Pematokan Rimba Milik Bersama Masyarakat Suhaid Tanpa Ijin Untuk Keperluan PT Kartika Prima Citra (PT KPC Sinar Mas Group) (Report of Boundary Marking of Suhaid Community Forest by PT Kartika Prima Citra without Permit from Community). Suhaid: Community of Suhaid Subdistrict.

2007b Siaran Pets: Penolakan Masyarakat Kecamatan Nanga Suhaid Terhadap Masuknya Perkebunan Kelapa Sawit PT. Kartika Prima Citra Sinar Mas Group (Press Release: Community of Suhaid Subdistrict Rejection Statement to Oil Palm Company PT Kartika Prima Citra Sinar Mas Group). Suhaid: Community of Suhaid Subdistrict.

Curran, L.M., S.N. Trigg, A.K. McDonald, D. Astiani, Y.M. Hardiono, P. Siregar, I. Caniago and E. Kasischke

2004Lowland Forest Loss in Protected Areas of Indonesian Borneo. Science 13:1000-1003.

DTE 2007 Oil Palm/Women: The Impacts of Oil Palm Plantations. Newsletter No. 74. London: International Campaign for Ecological Justice in Indonesia.

EJF 2002 End of the Road for Endosulfan: A Call for Action against a Dangerous Pesticide. London: Environmental Justice Foundation.

Enloe, C. 1989 Bananas, Beaches and Bases: Making Feminist Sense of International Politics. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Erman, A. 2005Investigation Report on Wildlife Trading; Orangutan and Lempiau (Hylobates sp) in the Border of Kapuas Hulu District, Indonesia and Sarawak Malaysia. Unpublished. Pontianak: Yayasan Titian and Yayasan Riak Bumi.

Ernawati, S. 2006 Women and Health. Unpublished. Pontianak: Yayasan Riak Bumi, WALHI and CIFOR.

2007 Women and Health. Unpublished. Pontianak: Yayasan Riak Bumi, WALHI and CIFOR.

European Union 2007 Promoting Biofuels as Credible Alternatives to Oil in Transport. Press release. Brussels: European Union.

Extension Toxicology Network (Extoxnet) 2008 EXTOXNET Global Search and Browse, http://extoxnet.orst.edu/ghindex. html. University of California-Davis, Oregon State University, Michigan State University, Cornell University, University of Idaho.

Eyes on the Forest 2005 More Than 40% of Riau's Fires Bum in APP and Partners' Concessions. Eyes on the Forest News, March 23.

Farid, I.Z. 2006 Characteristics of Land in DSNP Bufferzone Allocated for Oil Palm. Unpublished. Pontianak: Yayasan Riak Bumi.

Fernandez, I., E. Thomas, J.M. Anthony of Tenaganita and S.V. Rengam of Pesticide Action Network Asia and the Pacific

2002 Poisoned and Silenced: A Study of Pesticide Poisoning in the Plantations. Malaysia: Ganesh Printers.

Ficke, A.A., C.A. Myrick and L.J. Hansen 2005 Potential Impacts of Global Climate Change on Freshwater Fisheries. Gland, Switzerland: WWF.

Firmansyah 1996 Studi Jenis Tumbuhan Tempat Bersarang Lebah pada Suaka Margasatwa Danau Sentarum di Kabupaten Kapuas Hulu, Propinsi Kalimantan Barat (Plant Species Used by Wild Bees for Nesting and Breeding in Danau Sentarum Wildlife Reserve, Kapuas Hulu District, West Kalimantan), Agricultural Faculty, Tanjung Pura University, Pontianak.

Forestry Planning Agency 2002 Vegetation Cover of West Kalimantan. Ministry of Forestry.

Gaiser, N. 2009 Oil Palm in Kalimantan: The Meaning of Oil Palm Expansion on Local Farmers' Lives. Two Case Studies of Villages in Sanggau District, West Kalimantan. Freiburg: Albert Ludwigs-Universitat Freiburg.

Geographer 1965 Indonesia-Malaysia Boundary. Office of the Geographer, Bureau of Intelligence and Research, U.S. State Department.

Giesen, W. and J. Aglionby 2000 Introduction to Danau Sentarum National Park, West Kalimantan. Borneo Research Bulletin 31:5-28.

Hooijer, A., M. Silvius, H. Wosten and S. Page 2006 PEAT-CO2, Assessment of CO2 Emissions from Drained Peatlands in SE Asia. Delft Hydraulics report Q3943. Netherland: WL/Delft Hydraulics, Wetlands International, Alterra Wageningen.

Immirzi, C.P. and E. Maltby 1992 The Global Status of Peatlands and Their Role in Carbon Cycling. In: A report for Friends of the Earth by the Wetland Ecosystems Research Group, edited by Department of Geography, University of Exeter, UK. London: Friends of the Earth.

Indriatmoko, Y. and Abas 2007 Demography, Social and Economic Survey of Communities in and around DSNP. Unpublished. Bogor: CIFOR and Yayasan Riak Bumi.

Ishii-Eiteman, M.J. and N. Ardhianie 2002 Community Monitoring of Integrated Pest Management versus Conventional Pesticide Use in a World Bank Project in Indonesia. International Journal of Occupational Health 8:220-23 l.

IUCN 2009 IUCN Redlist http://www.iucnredlist.org/.

Jakarta Post 2003 Palm Oil Waste Kills Thousands of Fish. 9 June.

2009a Palm Oil Finns "Taking Away" Locals' Income. 19 May.

2009b Plantation Companies in Conflict with Villagers. 19 May.

Jeanes, K. and E. Meijaard 2000a Danau Sentarum's Wildlife Part 1: Biodiversity Value and Global Importance. Borneo Research Bulletin 31 : 150-229.

2000b Danau Sentarum's Wildlife Part 2: Habitat Characteristics and Biodiversity Contribution. Borneo Research Bulletin 31:230-245.

Johnson, W.W., and M.T. Finley 1980 Handbook of Acute Toxicity of Chemicals to Fish and Aquatic Invertebrates. Washington, DC: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Kapuas Hulu District Plantation and Forestry Service 2008 Spatial data of plantation areas in Kapuas Hulu District. Kapuas Hulu District Plantation and Forestry Service.

Kelana, A. and E.D. Larasati 2007 Bila ASI Tercemar Pestisida (IfBreastmilk is Contaminated by Pesticides). Gatra 27 Desember 2007.

Khudori 2008 Titik Balik Industri Sawit (The Turning Point of Palm Oil Industry). Kompas 24 November 2008.

Klepper, O. 1994 A Hydrological Model of the Upper Kapuas River and the Kapuas Lakes. Consultancy report for Asian Wetland Bureau/PHPA, for the UK-Indonesia Tropical Forest Management Project, Sub-project 5 Conservation.

Koesoemadinata, S. and R. Djajadiredja 1976 Some Aspects on the Regulation of Agricultural Uses of Pesticides in Indonesia, with Reference to Their Effects on Inland Fisheries. Paper presented at Seventeenth Indo-Pacific Fishery Commission (IPFC) Fisheries Symposium.

Kompas 2008 Produksi CPO Kalbar Turun (CPO Production from West Kalimantan is Declining). 24 November.

2009 Migor Bekas Diburu Masyarakat (People Hunt for Used Cooking Oil). 17 March 2008 ]cited 20 May 2009]. Available from http://sains.komp_as.com/ read/xml/2008/03/17/18490964/migor.bekas.pakai.diburu.masyarakat.

2009 Minyak Goreng Tembus Rp.13.000/kg (Cooking Oil Price Hits Rp.13,000/ kg). 3 March 2008 [cited 20 May 2009]. Available from http://www. kompas.com/read/xml/2008/03/03/21354721/minyak.goreng.tembus.rp13.000kg.

2009 Pada 2020, Indonesia Produksi 50 Jura Ton CPO (In 2020, Indonesia will Produce 50 Million Tons CPO). 29 May.

2009 Revitalisasi Kelapa Sawit Jerat Petani dengan Utang (Revitalization of Oil Palm Trapped Farmers with Debt). 13 November.

2009 Satu Gajah Ditemukan dalam Kondisi Hangus Terbakar (An Elephant was Found Burnt to Death). 11 June 2009.

Kottelat, M. and E. Widjanarti 2005 The Fishes of Danau Sentarum National Park and The Kapuas Lakes Area, Kalimantan Barat, Indonesia. Raffles Bulletin of Zoology Supplement 13:139-173.

Lloyd, R. 1987 Special Tests in Aquatic Toxicity for Chemical Mixtures: Interactions and Modification of Response by Variation of Physicochemical Conditions. In: V.B. Vouk, G.C. Butler, A.C. Upton, D.V. Parke and S.C. Asher eds., Methods for Assessing the Effects of Mixtures of Chemicals. Elsevier.

Lynch, O.J. and E. Harwell 2002 Whose Natural Resources? Whose Common Good? Towards a New Paradigm of Environmental Justice and the National Interest in Indonesia. Jakarta: ELSAM.

Malinau Participatory Mapping Facilitator Team 2000 Dampak Perkebunan Kelapa Sawit: Wakil Masyarakat Hulu Sungai Malinau Belajar di Kabupaten Pasir, Kalimantan Timur (The Impact of Oil Palm Plantation: Community Representatives from the Upstream of Malinau River Learned from People in Pasir District, East Kalimantan). Bogor: CIFOR.

Ministry of Agriculture 1997 Kriteria Kesesuaian Tanah dan Iklim Tanaman Pertanian. Planning Bureau, Ministry of Agriculture.

Minarchek, M. and Y. Indriatmoko 2010 Possibilities and Perceptions of a Community Micro-Hydro Project in West Kalimantan. Boerneo Research Bulletin (this issue).

National Pesticide Information Center 2000 Glyphosate factsheet. Corvallis: Oregon State University and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Page, S.E., R.A.J. Wust, D. Weiss, J.O. Rieley, W. Shotyk and S.H. Limin 2004 A Record of Late Pleistocene and Holocene Carbon Accumulation and Climate Change from an Equatorial Peat Bog (Kalimantan, Indonesia): Implications for Past, Present and Future Carbon Dynamics. Journal of Quarternary Science 19 (7):625-635.

Pahan, I. 2006 Panduan Lengkap Kelapa Sawit: Manajemen Agribisnis dari Hulu hingga Hilir. Depok, Indonesia: Penerbit Swadaya.

Paul, E.A. and T.J. Sinnott 2000 Information Bulletin: Fish and Wildlife Related Impacts of Pesticides Used for the Control of Mosquitoes and Blackflies. Albany, NY: Department of Environmental Conservation, Division of Fish, Wildlife, and Marine Resources.

Pesticide Action Network 2008 Pesticide Action Network database http://www.pesticideinfo.org/. Pesticide Action Network North America (PANNA).

Potter, L. and J. Lee 1998 Tree Planting in Indonesia: Trends, Impacts and Directions. Occasional Paper No. 18. Bogor: CIFOR.

1998 Oil Palm in Indonesia: Its Role in Forest Conversion and the Fires of 1997/98. A report for WWF-Indonesia programme, University of Adelaide.

Quijano, R. and S.V. Rengam nd Pestisida Berbahaya Bagi Kesehatan (Pesticide Is Dangerous to Human Health). Solo, Indonesia: Yayasan Duta Awam and Pesticide Action Network Asia and the Pacific.

Rachmatika, I., R. Nasi, D. Shell and M. Wan 2005 A First Look at the Fish Species of the Middle Malinau: Taxonomy, Ecology, Vulnerability and Importance. Bogor: CIFOR.

Rhee, S. 2003 De facto Decentralization and Community Conflicts in East Kalimantan, Indonesia: Explanations from Local History and Implications for Community Forestry. In: K.-1. Abe, W. d. Jong and T.-P. Lye, eds., The Political Ecology of Tropical Forests in Southeast Asia: Historical Perspectives Trans Pacific Press and Kyoto University Press.

Riau online 2005 Hasil Otopsi Ikan Sungai Siak Mati Akibat Limbah PKS (Fish Autopsy Concluded Palm Oil Wastes as the Cause of Mass Fish Deaths). 11 January.

2006 Bapedalda Riau Memperkirakan Limbah Sawit Diduga Penyebab Matinya Ikan di Sungai Siak (Riau Provincial Environmental Agency Estimated Palm Oil Wastes as the Cause of Fish Deaths in Siak River). Riau online, 4 October.

Rortais, A., G. Arnold, M.-P. Halm and F. Touffet-Briens 2005 Modes of Honeybees Exposure to Systemic Insecticides: Estimated Amounts of Contaminated Pollen and Nectar Consumed by Different Categories of Bees. Apidologie 36:71-83.

Roundtable for Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) 2007 RSPO Principles and Criteria for Sustainable Palm Oil Production Including Indicators and Guidance. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: Roundtable for Sustainable Palm Oil.

2007 FAQ on the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil. Zurich, Switzerland.

Russon et al. 2000 Declining Orangutan Populations in and around Danau Sentarum. Borneo Research Bulletin 31:372-384.

Russon, A.E., A. Erman and R. Dennis 2001 The Population and Distribution of Orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus pygmaeus) in and around the Danau Sentarum Wildlife Reserve, West Kalimantan, Indonesia. Biological Conservation 97:21-28.

Saenong, M.S. and A. Hipi 2005 Kerusakan Lingkungan dan Gangguan Kesehatan sebagai Dampak Penggunaan Pestisida Pertanian (Environmental Degradation and Health Problems Associated with Agricultural Pesticides). 13ALITSEREAL (Cereal Research Center).

Schuchardt, F., K. Wulfert, D. Darnoko and T. Herawan 2007 Effect of New Palm Oil Mill Processes on the EFB and POME Utilisation. Paper presented at Chemistry and Technology Conference PIPOC, Kuala Lumpur, 26-30 August.

Schweithelm, J. 1998 The Fire this time: an overview of Indonesia's Forest Fire in 1997/1998. WWF Indonesia Forest Fire Project. Jakarta, Indonesia: WWF Indonesia.

Sebastian, A.C. 2000 Proboscis Monkeys in Danau Sentarum National Park. Borneo Research Bulletin 31:359-371.

Silver, J. and B. Riley 2001 Environmental Impact of Pesticides Commonly Used on Urban Landscapes. Eugene, Oregon: Northwest Coalition for Alternatives to Pesticides/NCAP.

Sinar Harapan 2008 Menhut Desak lzin Kebun Kelapa Sawit Dicabut Dicabut (The Minister of Forestry Urged (District Government) to Withdraw Oil Palm Permits). Sinar Harapan.

Sirait, M. 2009 Indigenous Peoples and Oil Palm Plantation Expansion in West Kalimantan, Indonesia. Paper presented at ICRAF-CIFOR weekly presentation.

Siscawati, M. 2001 The Case of Indonesia: Under Soeharto's Shadow. In: The Bitter Fruit of Oil Palm: Dispossession and Deforestation. World Rainforest Movement.

Suci, E.S.T. 2006 Women and Child Trafficking in Indonesia: What Should Be Done? In The Fifth ASEAN People's Assembly (APA). Mandaluyong City, Philippines: The ASEAN Institutes of Strategic and International Studies (ASEAN ISIS).

Suhaimi, M. and H.K. Ong 2001 Composting Empty Fruit Bunches of Oil Palm. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: Malaysian Agricultural Research and Development Institute (MARDI).

Suriansyah, B. 2006 Penyebaran Buaya Senyulong Tomistoma schegelii di Danau Sentarum (Distribution of Tomistoma schegelii in Danau Sentarum National Park). Internal report. Sintang: Danau Sentarum National Park Authority.

Surma, E.H. 2007 Oil Palm: Loved and Loathed. In: E.L. Yuliani, D.J. Tadjudin, I. lndriatmoko, D.W. Munggoro, F. Gaban and F. Maulana eds., Multistakeholder Forestry: Steps for Change. Bogor: CIFOR.

UNDP 1998 Forest and Fires in Indonesia: Impacts, Factors and Evaluation. Jakarta: Ministry for Environment.

Usha, S. and V.R. Harikrishnan 2005 Endosulfan--Fact sheet and Answers to Common Questions. Thiruvananthapuram: IPEN Pesticide Working Group Project.

van Balen, S. and R.H. Dennis 2000 Birds of Danau Sentarum. Borneo Research Bulletin 31:336-358.

Verwer, C., P. van der Meer and G.J. Nabuurs 2008 Review of Carbon Flux Estimates and Other Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Oil Palm Cultivation on Tropical Peatlands--Identifying the Gaps in Knowledge. Alterra-rapport. Wageningen: Alterra.

Wadley, R.L. 2006 Wildlife Diversity on the Periphery of Danau Sentarum National Park, West Kalimantan, Indonesia. Borneo Research Bulletin 37:157-174.

Wadley, R. and C.J.P. Colfer 2004 Sacred Forest, Hunting, and Conservation in West Kalimantan, Indonesia Human Ecology 32 (3):313-338.

Wadley, R.L., R.A. Dennis, E. Meijaard, A. Erman, V. Heri and W. Giesen 2000 After the Conservation Project: Danau Sentarum National Park and Its Vicinity--Conditions and Prospects. Borneo Research Bulletin 31:385-401.

Wahyunto and I.N.N. Suryadiputra 2008 Peatland Distribution in Sumatra and Kalimantan: Explanation of Its Data Sets Including Source of Information, Accuracy, Data Constraints and Gaps. Bogor: Wetlands International--Indonesia Programme.

Wahyunto, R.S. and H. Subagjo 2004 Peta Sebaran Lahan Gambut, Luas dan Kandungan Karbon di Kalimantan /Map of Peatland Distribution Area and Carbon Content in Kalimantan 2000--2002. Bogor: Wetlands International--Indonesia Programme & Wildlife Habitat Canada (WHC).

Wakker, E. 1998 Palm Oil, Crisis, and Forest Loss in Indonesia. WWF, Germany.

WALHI 2009 Stop Forest Clearing for Oil Palm Plantation. Press release. Pontianak: WALHI-Greenpeace.

WHO Pesticides Evaluation Scheme (WHOPES) 2008 http://www.who.int/whopes/en/. World Health Organization.

Widiyanti, A. 2007 Cakupan PE Sawit Akan Ditambah (Scope of Palm Oil Export Tax Will Be Expanded), 15 May [cited 19 May 2009]. Available from http://www.detikfinance.com/read/2007/05/15/191002/781245/4/cakupan- sawitakan-ditambah.

World Growth 2009 Palm Oil--The Sustainable Oil. Arlington, VA: World Growth, Palm Oil Development Campaign.

Wulan, Y.C., Y. Yasmi, C. Purba and E. Wollenberg 2004 Analisa konflik sektor kehutanan di Indonesia 1997-2003 (An analysis of forestry conflict in Indonesia from 1997-2003). Bogor: CIFOR.

Yuliani, E.L. and A. Erman 2005 Present Trend of Resource Use in DSNE In Heart of Borneo Conference. Leiden.

Zen, Z., C. Barlow and R. Gondowarsito 2006 Oil Palm in Indonesian Socio-economic Improvement: A Review of Options. Oil Palm Industry Economic Journal 6:18-29.

Elizabeth Linda Yuliani

Center for International Forestry Research, JL. CIFOR, Sindang Barang

Bogor, West Java, Indonesia, L.yuliani@cgiar. org

Yayan Indriatmoko

Center for International Forestry Research, JL. C1FOR, Sindang Barang

Bogor, West Java, Indonesia, y.indriatmoko@cgiar.org

Mohammad Agus Salim

Center for International Forestry Research, JL. CIFOR, Sindang Barang

Bogor, West Java, Indonesia

Irham Zafarlan Farid

c/o Riak Bumi Foundation, astahiang@yahoo.co.id

Mumu Muhajir

HuMa (Consortium for Ecological and Community Based Law Reform) Learning Center

JL. Jatipadang Utara 1 No. 12, Jatipadang, Pasar Minggu, Jakarta Selatan, Indonesa, mumu.muhajir@gmail.corn

Leon Budi Prasetyo

Center for International Forestry Research, JL. C1FOR, Sindang Barang

Bogor, West Java, Indonesia, leon_bp@yahoo.corn

Valentinus Heri

Riak Bumi Foundation, JL. Putri Data Barn, Gg. Tani No. 1

Pontianak, West Kalimantan, Indonesia, herivalens@yahoo.com

(1) Data were collected in 2007 and 2008. Between 2007 and 2009, the USD-IDR exchange rate fluctuated between IDR 9,500 and IDR 11,700. In this paper, all calculations use the exchange rate 1 USD = IDR 10,000.

(2) We conducted a literature review on financial benefits of oil palm for local people to find information on the companies and locations mentioned; the research mostly contradicted the encouraging findings.

(3) Even though the main flow of the Kapuas River is from northeast to southwest, a significant volume flows into Danau Sentarum wetlands from the south during the dry season.

(4) The origin and other details of DSNP's creation are available from Giescn and Aglionby (2000), Wadley et al. (2000) and Aglionby (this volume).

(5) Forestry Act No. 41/1999 Article 15.

(6) "Harmonization" of the spatial planning and forest status maps.

(7) Government Regulation No. 68/1998, Article 56-57.

(8) We refer to Wahyunto and Suryadiputra's work because their data are the most complete, derived from extensive fieldwork in this location, and spatial data are available in digital format.

(9) Despite government propaganda, there are no data on the manufacture of biofuel from the palm oil produced by these companies because the companies have just started land clearing and planting.

(10) Getting quantitative data is difficult because of the sensitivity of the issue.

(11) The Roundtable for Sustainable Palm Oil was established in 2004 to promote the growth and use of sustainable oil palm products through credible global standards and engagement of stakeholders, in response to the urgent and pressing global call for sustainably produced palm oil. RSPO is a not-for-profit association that unites stakeholders from seven sectors of the palm oil industry - oil palm producers, palm oil processors or traders, consumer goods manufacturers, retailers, banks and investors, environmental or nature conservation NGOs and social or developmental NGOs-to develop and implement global standards for sustainable palm oil (RSPO website http://www.rspo.org/What_is_the_RSPO@.aspx, accessed 3 June 2009).

(12) "Forest area" refers to the government land-use classification and often does not reflect the actual characteristics (canopy, tree density, biodiversity, etc.) of the area. An area covered by big trees is not a forest if the government classifies it under a different category.

(13) Joint Ministerial Decree (Forestry, Agricultural, Agrarian) No. 364/Kpts-II/90 519/Kpts/ HK.050/7/90 and 23-VLI1-1990 on Forest Conversion Permit and Land Cultivation Rights (Hak Guna Usaha, HGU) approval for Agricultural Development.

(14) Ijin Pemanfaatan Kayu (Forestry Ministerial Decree No. 382/Menhut-II/2004 and Forestry Ministerial Regulation No. 55/2006).

(15) Ijin Peralatan (Forestry Ministerial Regulation No. P.54/Menhut-II/2007and No. P.4/ Menhut-II/2008).

(16) The RSPO Code of Conduct requires that all members work proactively toward the production and promotion of sustainable palm oil, and breaches can result in expulsion. The main objective of the RSPO has been to develop a certification scheme for sustainable palm oil. As the certification scheme is nearing completion, producer members will be required to work toward certified production (RSPO 2007). Criterion 7.3, for high conservation value forest, reads, "New plantings since November 2005 have not replaced primary forest or any area required to maintain or enhance one or more High Conservation Values."

(17) Criterion 2.2 relates to participation: "the right to use the land can be demonstrated, and is not legitimately contested by local communities with demonstrable rights." Part of the guidance for this criterion says that "for any conflict or dispute over the land, the extent of the disputed area should be mapped out in a participatory way." In addition, Criterion 6.1 reads, "Aspects of plantation and mill management, including replanting, that have social impacts are identified in a participatory way, and plans to mitigate the negative impacts and promote the positive ones are made, implemented and monitored, to demonstrate continuous improvement."

(18) No. 525/994/BANG-I-A, 4 AGU 2006.

(19) No. 525/61/DISPERHUT/BUN-A/2007.

(20) Act No. 18/2004 article 9(2), 17 and 25, Government Regulation No. 27/1999, Environmental Ministerial Regulation No. 11/2006 and the Ministry of Agriculture's decree No. 26/Permentan/05.140/2/2007.

(21) BAPEDALDA or Badan Pengendalian Dampak Lingkungan Daerah (Government Regulation No. 38/2007 Appendix H (Environmental sector) and Government Regulation No. 27/1999).

(22) Bupati Decree No. 144/2003.

(23) Bupati Decree No. 139/2008.

(24) The Minister of Forestry deemed the district government acted in violation of UU No. 26/2007, on national land-use planning.

(25) Pseudonyms are used to maintain confidentiality.

(26) To maintain access to future information, we need to protect the anonymity of our sources.

(27) These companies have not worked toward certified production and in particular have ignored

Criterion 4.4, "Practices maintain the quality and availability of surface and ground water," and Indicator 2, "Protection of water courses and wetlands, including maintaining and restoring appropriate riparian buffer zones."

(28) Peatland with a depth of more than 3 m is protected by Presidential Decree No. 32/1990 and Act No. 21/I 992. Watershed and water catchment areas should be protected, according to Act No. 24/1992, Government Regulation No. 47/1997, and Presidential Decree No. 32/1990.

(29) A study of orangutan populations and habitats within and around DSNP began in late 2009. The results of this study will give a more detailed picture of the effects of oil palm development.

(30) That is, companies that have been granted plantation permits but have never operated after they cleared the forest and sold the logs.

(31) Fish is the dominant source of income for local people in DSNP's wetlands; therefore we describe potential impacts on fish separately

(32) Although project activities can be done sustainably, environmental impact management is seen as an additional cost that companies tend to avoid. Lack of law enforcement has made this possible.

(33) The air temperature difference between cleared and forested land in DSNP's buffer zone is on average 6[degrees]C. Measurements were taken in November 2009.

(34) Dudley et al. (2000) reported that these fish species were commonly caught and economically important in the 1990s. Because of exploitation and unsustainable practices, these species have become very rare in the 2000s.

(35) Bioaccumulation and biomagnification of pesticides can also cause serious health problems for nonresidents if they regularly consume fish from the contaminated area.

(36) An AP1 higher than 100 is considered unhealthy.

(37) We believe the API is higher than these numbers. The Indonesia State of Environment 2007, published by lndonesia's Ministry of Environment, may be a good source; however, the data were not yet available when this paper was written.

(38) Income from arowana was determined by fecundity and mortality rates and number of juveniles sold.

Table 1. Values of bulk density and C-organic content

 Carbon content
 Bulk density (g/cc) (percentage)

Peat maturity Range Average Range Average

Fibric 0.11-0.33 0.13 35.6-49.6 42.6
Hemic 0.13-0.38 0.23 17.5-54.9 36.2
Sapric 0.26-0.33 0.27 13.2-57.8 35.5
Peaty mineral soil/ 0.30-0.40 0.32 26.85-32.55 30.75
 very shallow

Source: Wahyunto & Subagjo (2004).

Table 2. Extent of forest and peatland and potential below-ground
carbon stores in peatland allocated for plantations

 Extent of forest areas
 allocated or
 Plantation plantations (ha) **
 area (ha) Plantation
COMPANY * based on area (ha) Primary Primary
 press based on dry land swamp
 release digital map forest forest

PT. AMS 13,500 15,761.69
PT. BAK 16,000 no data
PT. BES 14,000 14,837.17
PT. BIA 18,500 20,587.53
PT. BSA 18,500 21,609.94
PT. BTS 14,000 17,732.92 6,151.09
PT. BTJ no data 23,883.77
PT. DNL no data 19,179.46
PT. KBA 17,000 21,798.21 40.77 3,585.93
PT. KIPI 18,000 18,940.71 135.60 3,895.65
PT. KSK no data 23,183.50 0.13
PT. KPC 18,000 19,821.90
PT. KAA 17,000 14,132.58 13,233.93
PT. MKA 14,000 no data
PT. PIP 18,000 no data
PT. Persada Graha 18,000 22,012.92
 Mandiri
PT. PNMS 18,000 20,818.68
PT. RAP no data 14,484.33
PT. RU 9,000 32,286.91 59.13
PT. SKM no data 18,893.79 5,471.37

 Extent of forest areas
 allocated or
 plantations (ha) ** Peatland
 area allo-
COMPANY * Secondary Secondary Total cated for
 dry swamp plantations
 forest forest (ha) ***

PT. AMS 479.21 1,059.00 1,538.22
PT. BAK
PT. BES 8,591.18 8,591.18 12,390.47
PT. BIA 6,227.41 13,485.94 19,713.35 19,775.92
PT. BSA 3,660.37 3,660.37 519.51
PT. BTS 6,151.09 6,100.91
PT. BTJ 12,519.78 12,519.78 5,211.57
PT. DNL 2,497.90 829.15 3,327.05
PT. KBA 1,287.85 4,914.55 7,363.68
PT. KIPI 4,309.42 470.51 8,811.18 4,628.08
PT. KSK 3,904.20 3,904.33
PT. KPC 6,356.07 6,356.07
PT. KAA 13,233.93 13,169.79
PT. MKA
PT. PIP
PT. Persada Graha 403.10 4,666.09 5,069.19 294.70
 Mandiri
PT. PNMS 5,328.41 5,328.41
PT. RAP 999.13 4.41 1,003.55
PT. RU 15.89 20,768.06 20,843.08 16,930.87
PT. SKM 5,471.37 3,891.96
 Below-
COMPANY * ground
 carbon
 (tons) ***

PT. AMS
PT. BAK
PT. BES 32,321,616
PT. BIA 37,460,331
PT. BSA 1,484,061
PT. BTS 3,264,866
PT. BTJ 2,825,800
PT. DNL
PT. KBA 4,280,392
PT. KIPI 3,340,494
PT. KSK
PT. KPC
PT. KAA 9,472,167
PT. MKA
PT. PIP
PT. Persada Graha 212,712
 Mandiri
PT. PNMS
PT. RAP
PT. RU 12,577,966
PT. SKM 2,809,172

* Kapuas Hulu District Plantation and Forestry Service written
opening address and spatial data.

** Our calculation, made by overlaying the plantation map with
Ministry of Forestry land cover data (2002).

*** Our calculation, made by overlaying the plantation map with
data on peat depth, distribution and average bulk density and
C-content of each peat type from Wahyunto & Subagjo (2004).

Table 3. Numbers of threatened wildlife species in DSNP.

Class Total # of threatened species
 species in DSNP based on 2009
 recorded in IUCN redlist
 DSNP
 Critically
 Extinct in ended Endan-
 Extinct wild gered gered

Reptiles * 27 1 0 0 5
Birds ** 282 0 0 1 2
Mammals * 143 0 0 0 11
Total 452 1 0 1 18

Class # of threatened species
 in DSNP based on 2009
 IUCN redlist

 Near Total Percentage
 Vulner- threaten- threatened threatened
 able ed species species

Reptiles * 5 1 12 44.4
Birds ** 12 63 78 27.7
Mammals * 22 11 44 30.8
Total 39 75 134

Sources: * Jeanes and Meijaard 2000a; ** van Balen and Dennis 2000.

Figure 5. Proportion of sensitive and tolerant fish species.

Inhabit or breed in forest
streams, swamps, clear water, 49.29%

Inhabit muddy water, 0.199052 133

No information or unclear, 0.30805 6872

Sources: Kottelat dan Widjanarti (2005), local fishermen interview,
www.fishbase.org, www.loaches.com, www.planetcatfish.com,
www.wetwebmedia.com, www.tropicalfishfinder.com.uk

Compiled and
synthesized by:
E. Linda Yuliani

Note: Table made from pie chart.

Figure 6. Proportion of carnivore, herbivore and omnivore fish in and
around DSNP.

Herbivore fish 4%
Omnivore fish 14%
No information 32%
Carnivore and zooplanktivore fish 50%

Sources: Kottelat dan Widjanarti (2005), www.fishbase.org, interview
with local fisherfolks

Note: Table made from pie chart.

Figure 7. Source of local people's main income (excluding arowana
breeding farms).

Pepper 2%
Crops 2%
Honey 12%
Fish 44%
Wood 19%
Rubber 21%

Source: Indriatmoko, this volume

Note: Table made from pie chart.