Bruno Manser Fonds
Tong Tana, December 2002
Journal of the Bruno Manser Fonds
on the subjects of rain forests, indigenous rights and timber trade
Post modern society defines well being through the power to purchase and consume. Ultimativly it demands an ever increasing production of new consumer goods to satisfy its desires - while simultaneously shutting down its own production centres. Lacking a moral sense, post modern society thereby condemns a greater part of mankind to live lives without future prospects an in powerlessness. Relocation of production centres to the so-called "developing countries" literally prevents a healthy, organic – i.e. sustainable – development in the societies of these countries. If post modern society cannot push through its interests via contracts, sanctions and blackmail then it has no scruples to use violence to this end, as the present war over the last oil reserves so essential to the system shows.
A period of economic recession, like the one we are currently experiencing, does have the positive side effect of exposing the unholy system of inter-dependencies and corruption – the "great" achievements of civilisation turn out to be one gigantic pomposity.
On November 19th, 2002, 247 Indonesians were escorted by the police of Sarawak to Kalimantan. These workers suddenly found themselves jobless after the foreign owner of 3 bankrupt plywood and furniture factories ran away. The Indonesians had been working for years in the factories, earning monthly salaries amounting to 100 US dollars.
Many of Sarawaks indigenous people still resist taking up work under such bad conditions. Still, but for how much longer? Every day their own sustainable economic system is being destroyed with political blessings, international financing by global companies and cheap day labour. Soon they, who have lived independently for centuries and millennia will have no other option but to lay aside their self-respect, their culture and their knowledge and to sell themselves as paid slaves.
Unless the negative economic situation continues. For the Penan and many other indigenous peoples the present economic depression is a blessing. The present lack in demand has also silenced the bulldozers and chainsaws – and the foreign workers, that constantly growing and so easy to manipulate mass of the disempowered, are being carted home.
The crisis also opens prospects for post modern society. We have been basking in so-called civilisation for so long, that we are unaware (or wish to be) of its creeping decline. If the societies of hunters and gatherers, herders and farmers and their functioning systems enabled this development of civilisation, it is becoming more and more clear what to expect in at the end of the de-civilisation process: the undermining of solidarity, violence, segregation of the classes and escapism from meaninglessness into senseless cynicism.
Though not religious in the conventional sense Bruno Manser relied on his own experience, his own heart, his personal faith. When he first climbed the Batu Lawi end of the 1980s, he suddenly found himself in a seemingly hopeless situation on the steep face: He was stuck without any possibilities of climbing down. Bruno prayed – and was heard. The next morning, having already resigned himself to his fate, he found remains from a previous climb. He made himself a rope and narrowly escaped death. The prayer he sent to heaven and earth deals with our responsibility towards our fellow human beings and all creation. Only solidarity shows the way out of darkness and only together can we continue Bruno’s work.
The BMF team wishes you, your loved ones and all of us together a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!
John Künzli & BMF team
the power of creation
giver of life
guide as on our way
where there is pain -
bring comfort - You!
where there is hunger
bring food - You!
where there is quarrel
bring love - You!
All of us together
from: Prays for a thousand years.
Edited by Elisabeth Roberts and Elias Amidoh, Harpu, San Francisco, USA, 1999 (ISBN 0-06-066875-X)
During another unsuccessful search for Bruno in August 2002, organised by Erich Manser, a commemorative plaque in the language of the Penan was placed at the Batu Lawi. Your love lives – we will never forget you!
Tong Tana /Top of page
Ulu Baram Penan communities sue logging firm and Sarawak government to claim native customary rights land and the process exposes the dirty ploy of Samling to incite hatred and inter-tribal rivalries for its own gain while using that in its attempt to disrupt the hearing of the case.
The Plaintiffs in this case are the 4 Penan communities of Long Kerong, Long Sepigen, Long Sait and Long Ajeng who claim native customary rights-land (NCR) located in the Upper Baram, Miri, Sarawak. The Defendants in this case are the Government of the State of Sarawak and the multinational timber Company Samling.
The Penan communities claimed native customary rights over the land and forests in and around the Selungo River in the upper reach of the Baram District. It is their contention in this action for a declaration of such rights by the High Court.
The companies claimed that they have the rights to log the area by virtue of the timber logging licences issued to them by the Sarawak Government. The state government of Sarawak denied that the Penan can claim any native customary rights to the land. Both the government and Samling and insist on the following points:
The government of Sarawak pleads that the High Court not grant the plaintiffs legal counsel. Samling also wants to sue the Penan for destruction of infrastructure and machines, despite the fact that most of the culprits were unknown and those Penan actually prosecuted had been found innocent in court.
The case was filed in the Miri High Court in 1998 and it was scheduled for hearing commencing on the 24th September 2002.
This hearing was the first of the NCR land cases involving the Penan communities in Sarawak. Many Penan communities all over the state, in particular the rural interior of Baram, sent their representatives to Miri to support the 4 communities involved in this case.
However, to their disappointment and many others who have been supportive of the Penan struggle in Sarawak, the Miri High Court was told that 3 new applications had been filed in the same Court and that the hearing had to be adjourned.
The Court was as puzzled as the more than 30 Penan who appeared in Court that morning of 24.09.2002 as to why the Kenyah communities of Long Semiang and Lio Mato would want to be added as defendants in this action, and that Samling and the state government were so quick to jump in with their applications to amend their pleadings.
The lawyer who represented the 2 Applicants was from Messrs Tan Yap and Tang Advocates of Kuching. He told the Court that the hearing of this case between the Penan and Samling and the state government had only come to the knowledge of the 2 Applicants recently and they wanted to be added as defendants because it was their claim that certain area claimed by the Penan was land belonging to the 2 Kenyah communities.
To a question by the Judge, the lawyer from Messrs Reddi and Co Advocates representing Samling and the legal officer representing the state government both did not agree that the 2 Kenyah communities could claim native customary rights over the land (!).
It was however the plaintiffs' lawyer who told the Court that he believed that the 2 Kenyah communities had Native Customary Rights (NCR) to land in and around their communities but he doubted if the extent of Long Semiang and Lio Mato’s NCR land covers the land claimed by the Penan communities.
It was therefore astonishing why the 2 Kenyah communities would want to join Samling and the state government to be defendants when they clearly said that they did not believe that the 2 Kenyah communities had any NCR land in the area.
The hearing was therefore adjourned, pending the determination of the 3 applications.
It is now clear that it was in fact a ploy by Samling to disrupt the hearing of the case.
The Penan of the Upper Baram do not want industrial wood exploitation in their territories, even if it is done "sustainably": Rejection of the Samling/FOMISS-Project in 1999.
Vast forest areas are "protected for the forestry industry"; road by Samling in the area of the nomads of Limbang river..
In August 2002, some workers of Samling together with a lawyer visited the Kenyah communities of Long Tungan, Long Semiang and Lio Mato telling the inhabitants of the said 3 Kenyah communities that if the Penans’ claims against the Company and the state government were successful, all the land in the area would be given to the Penan and that the inhabitants of the 3 Kenyah communities of Long Tungan, Long Semiang and Lio Mato would be driven out of the area and that the 3 Kenyah communities would no longer be entitled to claim any goodwill payments from Samling.
The 3 Kenyah communities of Long Tungan, Long Semiang and Lio Mato were told that Samling would assist them to claim their native customary rights (!) over their land to enable them to continue to enjoy the goodwill payments.
On 2.9.2002, the headman of Long Tungan went to Kuching to Samling’s lawyer who told him that he would assist Long Tungan community to claim their land rights from the Penans and continue to enjoy the goodwill payments from Samling if the community carry out all that is required of the community. He then passed various papers, such as a Power of Attorney, a Warrant To Act, a Summons In Chambers and an Affidavit.
These documents were actually a blanket power of attorney to Samling to proceed against the Penan suit in the name of the Kenyah.
They were additionally presented with the signed 1993 "goodwill" agreement in which the Kenyah had committed themselves to allow Samling to clear without hindrance in the three "village territories". From 1994 to 2013 Samling pays annually 2,187 US$ to the 67 families of Long Tungan, 1,297 US$ to the 52 families of Lio Mato and 1,305 US$ to the 40 families of Long Semiang for this "keep quiet agreement".
Hitched on to these "goodwill" payments is, additionally, a relinquishment by the Kenyah of their land rights – even though Samling has, from the outset, denied the Kenyah and the Penan any rights to claims. Thereby, with annually roughly CH Fr. 50.- per family, Samling secured for itself the logging rights to the "village territories" for 20 years, which is what is happening.
For decades the Samling Company has made life difficult for the sedentary Penan on the Baram...
... and is destroying the habitat of the last nomadic Penan on the Adang river. (Foto: abandonned nomad hut)
Now, Samling is threatening the 3 communities that the goodwill payments will stop if they refuse to help the Company in defending against the Penan in this case, as it was wrongly represented to them. If the Penans were successful in this action, the 3 Kenyah communities would lose their rights to land and have no more rights to claim the goodwill payments from Samling.
The committee members of Long Tungan met with the Penan headmen and representatives of Long Sait, Long Sepigen and Long Kerong and the headman revealed that Long Tungan refused to participate in this application (even though he was told that Long Semiang and Lio Mato had already signed to assist Samling) because the committee and him felt that:
"It was incorrect and improper to obtain such a blanket authority from all the inhabitants of Long Tungan and to act on what was not the intention of the community of Long Tungan but that of Samling."
The Long Tungan community had told the lawyer that they did not know any of Samling‘s lawyers and they could not afford to engage them as counsels to act on their behalf, that they could not possibly undertake to remit these counsels as may be required. He was told that Samling would pay for the disbursement, costs or expenses and professional fees of the counsels but his request that the Warrant To Act be amended to specify that Samling undertakes to pay for the lawyers was rejected.
Further, Long Tungan made clear that it was not their intention to apply to be added as defendants in the suit, and neither were they told that they had to be so added as defendants in the first place. The committee felt that it was not right to take sides and therefore they refused to make the application as was represented in the Summons In Chambers.
The committee also doubted the correctness of certain statements made in affidavit claiming that the facts contained therein were "incorrect, erroneous and or misleading".
The Committee of Long Tungan and that of Long Sait, Long Kerong and Long Sepigen agreed that both the Kenyah and Penan communities in and around the Selungo River must work together for their continuous co-existence in peace and harmony and that all communities be free to practise their subsisting native customary rights over the common area shared by these communities.
The courage and sensibility of the Long Tungan Community deserves to be commended. They knew that Samling would be infuriated by their decision not to participate in the application with Long Semiang and Lio Mato and that they would risk losing the goodwill payments as from this year. In the meantime, Samling’s strategy gained some success, as a part of the community changed frontiers. The tension and quarrels which are dividing the community now are exactly what Samling had intended.
Samling must be condemned for such dirty and unscrupulous tactics that they will even resort to incite hatred and rivalries amongst the native communities in order to defend their logging operations.
The Court was certainly not aware of such immoral and dishonest acts of Samling aiming to delay and obstruct the hearing of the Penan’s claim because only the Summons In Chambers and the Affidavit were filed in Court.
The Penan communities have now filed their Affidavit In Opposition together with all the papers given by Samling’s lawyer to the Kenyah communities to expose this dirty ploy of Samling. One can only hope that the Court will be made aware of what lies beneath those applications and that the Court will reject them and order for an early hearing of the Penan’s rightful claim. In the meantime, the hearing has been set to continue mid of January 2003.
Bulldozers against the rainforest, tear gas against the Penan. Samling shows no consideration and ...
.. can count on the help of police and military to break the Penans‘ resistance.
Tong Tana /Top of page
jk – Even if the powerful elite of Sarawak aren’t at all pleased: Maps play a key role in the fight for land rights, to identify territorial boundaries as well as to substantiate the legality of the claims.
In the beginning of the 1990s the Penan had already been making simple maps like those that were attached to the 1998 suit. In those days courts all around the world had just started to give the indigenous peoples their land back on the basis of such maps.
Due to circumstances the mapping of the Penan territories only proceeded very slowly. The Penan asked for such a project with regard to the suit of the four Panan villages when the High Court, for the first time ever in the history of Sarawak, accepted maps as proof in May 2001.
Mapping is a costly project, in respect to staff as well as financial resources. Apart from the schooling of the Penan in field work (a mix of diverse techniques) and the consultations with community members, the necessary infrastructures downstream had to be established. A bigger office was rented and temporary assistants hired, the hard- and software had to be brought up to date to a reasonable degree and the prerequisites for efficient communication in Sarawak installed. Practically all the work is done by the Penan themselves. Experienced foreign experts only hold workshops and check results. The results of the mapping teams are regularly checked for conclusiveness, flaws and loopholes by local lawyers and international experts and the schooling adjusted. All parties concerned get paid for their work. Court costs as well as the expensive local and international journeys are the other main expenses. Satellite communication is expensive but has proved to be invaluable, especially during the developments around the court cases.
Early in 2002 the BMF together with representatives elected by the Penan developed a mapping project covering the 16 settlements at the source of the river Baram as well as 8 territories of nomadic Penan. The project was estimated at CHF 650,000.-, which exceeds the possibilities of the BMF. Fortunately gallery owner Ernst Beyeler, in Basel, of the "ART FOR TROPICAL FORESTS" foundation, founded in November 2001, was interested and end of June 2001 we handed in a formal request for financial support for this project. The entire project is divided into 9 phases; phase 1 (current court case of the 4 settlements) started in the beginning of 2002 and, in the mean time, has already been concluded. Phase 2 and 3 aim to map three further settlements, respectively 2 nomad territories. For this pilot project (phases 1 - 3) we requested totally CHF 150,000.- for this pilot project, with our share amounting to SFr. 26,000.-.
Even though the foundation "ART FOR TROPICAL FORESTS" received far more requests than expected, the council of the foundation decided to support this project with 120,000 francs!
This amount enables us to proceed with the planned project with just a few cuts, as the legal actions of phases 2/3 are only due to be dealt with at a later point in time. The results of the pilot project will determine whether "ART FOR TROPICAL FORESTS" continues their support (the whole project should be completed by end of 2004), which necessitates some travelling to Sarawak. The enthusiasm of the Penan, the commitment of the local NGOs, the developing cooperation amongst the Dayak peoples as well as the assessments of the lawyers and the latest verdicts, all are positive indications and give hope.
The BMF would like to thank the founding member Ernst Beyeler and "ART FOR TROPICAL FORESTS" in the name of the Penan and in the name of all the project partners cordially!
à coming soon: www.artfortropicalforests.org
From memory the Penan draw an astonishingly exact map of their territory.
Then Sago groves, hunting areas, grave yards, and abandonned huts are added, by means of compass and satellite navigation.
Tong Tana /Top of page
ch – Global protection of the pristine forests demands local action as, for example, in the framework of the Local Agenda 21. Therefore the Bruno-Manser-Fonds and Greenpeace Switzerland launched the campaign "Pristine-Forest-Friendly Community". Every Swiss community was invited by letter to make an active contribution to the protection of the pristine forests and to make their building and construction industry "pristine-forest-friendly".
Every day 40,000 hectares of pristine forest are destroyed by overexploitation. And mainly where there are still extensive primeval forests as in Russia, Canada, Brazil, Indonesia and the Congo.
One of the main reasons for this destruction of the forest are our short-sighted consumer habits: Wood from primeval forests can be found in objects such as plywood boards, doors, photocopy and toilet paper, etc. This need not be so, because there are "pristine-forest friendly" alternatives.
Due to the previous community campaign of the Bruno-Manser-Fonds 306 communities and six cantons had, by September 2002, already renounced wood from overexploitation. It was important to the BMF to acknowledge these earlier endeavours in protecting the pristine forests. Therefore these communities were specially urged to further protection of the forests by also supporting the use of recycled paper and by reducing their paper consumption. But even without an additional resolution concerning recycled paper these communities are still regarded as "pristine-forest-friendly".
By the beginning of December 31 new communities have signed the BMF and Greenpeace declaration.
All in all there are now 327 "pristine-forest friendly communities" (see list on page 8). In February 2003 all these communities will be presented with a beautiful plaque in acknowledgement.
With great dedication Markus Holenstein designed and realised the internet sites www.urwaldfreundlich.ch (in German) or www.foretsanciennes.net (in French) for Greenpeace and the Bruno-Manser-Fonds during his civilian service. At this site you can find, not only the weekly updated list of the "pristine-forest-friendly communities" but also all the important news and many leaflets.
Texts about the campaign in Italian and Raeto-Romanic at www.urwaldfreundlich.ch/index.php3?id=6 !
Is the community already "pristine-forest-friendly" (see www.urwaldfreundlich.ch)? If not ask at the community administration or office what happened to the BMF and Greenpeace enquiry (dated 12.09.2002).Are they informed? If so ask for the appropriate person (i.e. the community notary, person-s responsible for the environmental issues) or give a short explanation of the campaign and send the documents again. Is the enquiry being dealt with? Then go on to step 2. Was it rejected? Was a formal resolution passed by the community council or president? If not go on to step 2 (maybe 3). If so, then ask for a statement of the minutes, study them, and go on to step 3. Is the community in favour of it but does not want to formally "become a member"? Ask for the minutes of the corresponding resolution and study them. Maybe the resolution passed is strict enough for the community to be allowed to be called "pristine-forest-friendly". If not, go on to step 3.
2. lobbyingTalk to a community council member or a member from a local party, etc. about the subject matter before the relevant meeting of the community council and try to convince them.
3. arguments and political pressureIn small communities it is possible to talk to the president of the community council, a community council member or other local organisations (for ex. the society for the protection of birds, the Girl and Boy Scouts) and form a pressure group or, if a negative resolution has been passed, demand a reconsideration. Go prepared with good arguments (i.e. possible reduction of expenditures)! Those entitled to vote can submit a motion at the community council meeting (inform yourself about correct procedures!). In towns and bigger communities: Either convince a community politician to submit a motion in the council or parliament or write a letter to the community council or the town council; through the signatures of as many local inhabitants as possible the letter acquires political clout! To launch a petition together with a political or civil group (for ex. an environ-mental association) in the community and to collect signatures demands more effort but promises greater success. Inform the local media of the submission of the petition!
4. follow up
If the request/petition has not yet been dealt with: Insist on it being dealt with by the appropriate body (usually the community council). This demands staying power because the political mills grind slowly especially in bigger communities and issues often have to be dealt with by an appointed committee beforehand. If a "pristine-forest-friendly" resolution is then passed, please inform the BMF (email@example.com).
Leaf of a member of the Araceae family (Monstera friedrichsthali) from Central America
As part of the campaign "Pristine-Forest-Friendly Community" BMF was able to ask Mr Claude Gury, director of public services for the community of Pruntrut, a few questions. Pruntrut, a town of about 6,700 inhabitants in the canton of Jura, had decided in 1996 to renounce the use of tropical wood in public buildings and, instead, to propagate the use of indigenous wood.
BMF: What motivated the town authorities of Pruntrut to make this decision?
C. Gury: Due to Mrs Charlotte Bélet’s [a BMF member] petition the town council decided to renounce wood from overexploitation on the 12th December 1996, also because the population was strongly sensitized to the topic. These measures were even welcomed by the local businesses that process indigenous wood.
BMF: How is this decision applied? Have there been any difficulties?
C. Gury: There is no control whether wood from overexploitation is used. Because Pruntrut is a small town the town administration does not use such wood, however. Whenever the administration approves a construction plan it also encloses a recommendation not to use wood from overexploitation. This leaflet was developed according to your organisation’s advioce. It proposes substitute woods and seems to be well received.
BMF: As there is no direct control: Are the non-acceptable wood species at least mentioned in the announcements?
C. Gury: No, but we will rectify this lack.
BMF: What recommendations can you give concerning the use of woods from sustainable management to other towns/communities?
C. Gury: It seems to be easy to apply the recommendations. Other communities in our region have asked us for the developed recommendations and we have, of course, passed them on.
BMF: Greenpeace and the BMF have lanced the campaign "Pristine-Forest-Friendly Community" to win further Swiss communities over to renouncing wood from overexploitation and simultaneously for them to reduce their consumption of paper and to support the use of recycled paper. Is the town of Pruntrut also participating?
C. Gury: We are prepared to examine the possibilities how other communities could also implement these measures. The same applies to the use of recycled paper.
BMF: Thank you for this interview and we wish the town of Pruntrut all the best in applying the stated measures.
Primary Forest in the Udjung Kulon National Park , Java and in Kao Yai NP, Thailand (1985)
jrd – In the last years less recycled paper is being used in spite of a considerable improvement in quality. It is even not good enough for some authorities…
As part of the campaign "pristine forest friendly community" we would like to support use of recycled paper, because the cellulose of conventional paper usually comes from clearing of the primeval forest of the North (i.e. Canada) as well as from the Tropics (i.e. Indonesia).
Outdated and false statements are still being circulated about the characteristics and possible uses of recycled paper, as is the one about how expensive it is. At http://www.urwaldfreundlich.ch/download/aktivisten/Killerargumente.doc you can find the counter arguments (in German).
So don’t only diligently collect used paper but when you go shopping or go to the photocopy shop demand recycled paper products like photocopy paper, toilet paper, writing pads, envelopes, etc. so that demand for them is created. But even then remember: Use with thrift! Also use both sides of a piece of paper; double sided copying is possible with most photocopiers today.
Sources and links:
www.altpapier.ch www.fups.ch www.paperrecovery.org www.foretsanciennes.net
Clearcut in Canada
jk – The campaign in co-operation with Greenpeace costs CHF 35,000.- and is one of the most expensive BMF projects of 2002 only following the journal (roughly CHF 70,000.-, postage included) and the mapping of the Penan territories in Sarawak. Two thirds of the amount are allotted to salaries, CHF 6,500.- to printing costs, CHF 4,000.- to translations and postage. The BMF would have been in deep trouble if we could not rely on our volunteers’ help with the postage – many thanks!
Penan couple on the way through the forest, Sarawak 2002
Tong Tana /Top of page
ch/jk – After the speeches held by Ruth-Gaby Vermot (president of the Society for Threatened Peoples), John Künzli (BMF) and Erich Manser, a good atmosphere was created by the many artists who volunteered to perform on the Kornhausplatz in Bern. The short downpour in the early evening was not able to dampen the good atmosphere.
Inge von der Crone told Penan legends and stories.
John Künzli guided the interested through the exhibition.
The ceremony by the "Kids for forests" would surely have pleased Bruno very much.
Then Barni Palm and Bettina Horisberger fascinated the audience with their musical improvisation.
The singer and songwriter Tinu Heiniger’s performance was, to many, the highlight of the evening.
Unfortunatly it started to rain towards the end of the Appenzeller Stuibemusig Rechsteiner's performance.
All in all the opening party and the three exhibition weeks in Bern were quite a success. We would like to, once again, thank the many volunteers and all the artists!
The exhibition, which closed on 14th September 2002, was well frequented with roughly 1,200 entrances, including several school classes. The accounting closes with an expenditure of CHF 16,165.- (salaries included) and a deficit of CHF 10,300.- which would have been even higher without the generous donation from the town and canton of Bern of CHF 2,800.- – many thanks! The deficit was to be expected and, in future, we do not plan to hold the exhibition independently anymore. But Bern was worth this expense as the exhibition had already been held in all the bigger German speaking Swiss towns
Home Page/ Tong Tana /Top of page
jk – Almost as soon as she entered office Ruth Dreifuss was seen sitting at the Bärenplatz in Bern together with Bruno Manser, knitting a pullover intended to warm the hearts of the political elite. Mrs Federal Councillor’s courage, persistency and staying power were extremely valued by Bruno – characteristics which will surely be upheld in her newly reacquired freedom! The BMF congratulates Mrs Dreifuss for her successful time in office and would like to thank her, in Bruno Manser’s name as well as in that of the People of the Rainforests, for her many years of support. Hoping Your wishes will be fulfilled – You have deserved it!
Bruno and the newly elected Federal Councillor Ruth Dreifuss, March 1993.
jk – The strategy (à see Tong Tana December 2001) to compensate the loss of our founder and president Bruno Manser by expanding was well thought through and ambitioned but turned out to be difficult to realise – especially in economically difficult times. Despite the call to caution at the July 2002 annual assembly and the resulting cuts in the budgeted income by 40,000 francs and the resulting growth of the expected deficit to 50,000 francs, but even this estimation apparently was overoptimistic (à see Tong Tana September 2002). In comparison to the previous semester an increase in donations would now only be possible if this journal were to bring in many more donations than others before.
How the BMF uses the money is published in the journals (à for ex. Tong Tana December 2001) and the members are informed in detail. The amounts concerning the big BMF projects of this year can be found in this edition.
The generous contribution from the foundation "ART FOR TROPICAL FORESTS" does not signal relief: The foundation has also assumed our expenses acquired during last year and mainly since the beginning of 2002 of roughly 50,000 francs. This "refund" enabled us to just barely survive. Expenditure of the greater amounts – bound to projects – is due to be dealt with but does not relieve the current annual account.
Measures to economize will have to be implemented, but: Where should/can we safe money? We could consider sending out only 2 instead of 3 editions of the journal – but the journals constitute our greatest source of income… The only other possibility is to reduce employment costs which, though, are already at lowest levels demanding quite some idealism from the employees. Employee reduction would also affect our campaigns negatively which would result in less publicity and less donations.
Nevertheless: The solution to this dilemma lies in a change of strategy which entails a partial retreat from publicity and, at the same time, concentrating on a few commissions. Despite all, dear readers, we still depend on your support. If you are of the opinion that the Bruno-Manser-Fonds does good work, then please donate an annual fee if you haven’t done so already! It’s not possible without your help! Thank you very much!
Many thanks, of course, to all the loyal donators who regularly support the BMF with 50, 500 or 5’000 francs. Every amount counts. To us every donation is an incitement and a motivation to fulfil the commission given us by Bruno Manser, the Penan and the People of the Rain Forests!
Along Segah, chief of the nomads in the Ulu Limbang area, should soon hold in his hands a better documentation of his very existence; august 2002.
Home Page/ Tong Tana /Top of page
Society for the peoples of the rainforest
Heuberg 25, CH-4051 Basel, Switzerland
Telephone ++41 61 261 94 74
Fax ++41 61 261 94 73
Editors: John Künzli, J. Rudolf Dietrich
Authors: J.R. Dietrich (jrd), Claude Haltmeyer (ch), J. Künzli (jk)
Photos: BMF, Roger Graf, Greenpeace, Erich Manser, Penan activists
Title: Bruno Manser
Translations: Nicole Widmer (English); Robert Gogel (French); J. Künzli (German)
Edition: 5800 (3700 German, 1400 French, 700 English)
Printed by Gremper AG, Basel
Switzerland/Liechtenstein: Post account # 40-5899-8
Bank Coop, 4002 Basel, Acct. 421329.29.00.00-5
France: La Poste, Strasbourg, Acct. CCP 2.604.59T
Germany: Deutsche Bank, Lörrach (BLZ 683 700 24) Acct. 1678556; IBAN = DE85 6837 0024 0167855600
Please note: Voluntary contributions are very welcome and very
needed! Thank you!
Home Page/ Tong Tana /Top of page