Minnesota’s Cargill accused of ignoring law in Indonesian palm oil harvest

By Molly Priesmeyer
Friday, May 21, 2010 at 5:30 am

Land clearing at Indo Sawit Kekal. Photo: Kontak Masyarakat Borneo for RAN

Local agri-giant Cargill has encountered a series of public relations hurdles lately. Just last week the Minnetonka-based company announced it had reached an undisclosed settlement with Stephanie Smith, a former dance instructor from Minnesota who was left paralyzed and with brain and kidney damage after getting E. coli from a hamburger processed at a Cargill plant. (The story didn’t appear in local press until after the New York Times did an investigation that led to a Pulitzer Prize.)

And the week prior to the settlement with Smith, five people from the Rainforest Action Network (RAN) locked themselves inside the Cargill headquarters, demanding to speak with CEO Gregory Page about what the environmental organization says is Cargill’s continued destruction of rain forests for the harvesting of palm oil, for which Cargill is the nation’s number-one importer.

The protest was a response to a damaging RAN report released on May 4, in which the organization calls company’s claims of sustainability bogus by claiming, among other things, that Cargill is operating a plantation in Indonesia without proper permits; that Cargill is clearing and burning rainforests and peatlands and damaging the environment and local communities in Borneo and Indonesia; and that Cargill has not been transparent about the plantations it owns.

Rainforest Action Network actists protest at Cargill's Minnetonka HQ on May TBD. Photo: TBD

Rainforest Action Network actists protest at Cargill's Minnetonka HQ on May 4.

On May 5, Cargill responded on Twitter, firing off a Tweet that simply said, “Cargill sets the record straight on false allegations” to anyone discussing the report on Twitter. Provided was also a link to Cargill’s extensive response, which denied all of the allegations in the RAN report. Instead, Cargill says it does not burn rainforests; it does not operate any undisclosed plantations; it doesn’t operate against local owners’ wishes; and it does not operate outside of Indonesian law.

RAN’s Agribusiness Campaign Director, Leila Salazar-Lopez, says Cargill is being dishonest in the face of accusations.

“We don’t want to make this a tit for tat he-said/she-said argument,” Salazar-Lopez tells the Minnesota Independent. “But the fact of the matter is, pictures and maps don’t lie. We continue to stand by the findings in our report that Cargill is responsible for rainforest and peatland destruction in Indonesia and that Cargill has violated the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) principles and criteria, Indonesian law, and its own palm oil commitments.”

One of the biggest issues Cargill continues to deny, Salazar-Lopez says, is that Cargill subsidiary, CTP Holdings, has cleared and burned rainforests and peatlands for palm oil plantations despite Cargill’s claim of sustainability. The company says the area is not designated as primary forest, a claim Salazar-Lopez refutes.

“The Ministry of Forestry in Indonesia believes that those lands are forests,” Salazar-Lopez says. “So Cargill saying that their land is not any where near rainforests is absolutely not true. Forests have been cleared at ISK [Indo Sawit Kekal] as recent as February 2010, since Cargill/CTP acquired ISK in 2005.”

Susan Eich, a Cargill spokesperson, says the company stands by its initial response to the report. “We think the allegations are false,” she told the Minnesota Independent. “We have answered every specific point in there. We take issue with that report and we stand by our response… We do not clear rain forests.”

RAN maintains that documentation it has obtained shows otherwise.

Relying on registries and permits Indonesian local government offices in Indonesia and from Indonesia’s Ministry of Forestry, RAN says Indo Sawit Kakal is located in a production forest area. In addition, these areas are protected by the Indonesian Ministry of Forestry from palm oil production, and Salazar-Lopez says that while Cargill did not obtain a license to cut the timber in this area, the company still deforested more than 10,500 hectares in that region since 2005.

A Google map "showing that PT Indo Sawit Kekal is located in a production forest area," according to RAN. Click to enlarge

A Google map "showing that PT Indo Sawit Kekal is located in a production forest area," according to RAN. Click to enlarge.

In addition to cutting forests, Salazar-Lopez says Cargill’s Indo Sawat Kakal plantation operating outside of Indonesian law because is missing three of four required permits. “They don’t have a timber cutting permit, a business operating license, or a plantation business permit. So now Cargill is admitting they do operate this plantation, and what we’re saying now is, you’re admitting that you are operating this plantation that is in violation of many Indonesian laws. “

Salazar-Lopez says the destruction is devastating for a number of reasons. For one thing, despite its size, Indonesia is the third largest greenhouse gas emitter in the world, all of it a result of intense deforestation and gas emissions from peat bogs. For another, Indonesia is home to numerous endangered species, including the orangutan. And furthermore, Indonesian communities are being adversely affected by the destruction of farmland, rivers, and forests, she says.

Matilda Pilacapio, a human rights and environmental advocate and former government official from Papua New Guinea, has been an outspoken opponent of Cargill’s practices in her homeland. In September of 2009, she brought her story and images to the Twin Cities. Cargill, which operates three palm oil plantations in Papa New Guinea, has been recently targeted by Papa New Guinea residents and local and national NGOs, which accuse the Minnesota company of polluting rivers and deceiving local communities.

Still, despite the NGO accusations and outcry from local communities over the last year, Salazar-Lopez says Cargill still operates in violation of the company’s own claims of sustainability and corporate responsibility, clearing forests in Indonesia as recently as February of this spring.

“If Cargill is going to claim they are committed to sustainable palm oil, they need to provide it,” Salazar-Lopez says. “There is a reason [Cargill’s Harapan Sawit Lestari] HSL plantation hasn’t been RSPO certified—because they have problems. The International Monetary fund has placed a moratorium on palm oil financing because they are major problems with it worldwide.”

Salazar-Lopez says that if Cargill is truly sustainable, the company will also commit to ensuring their plantations and suppliers are sustainable.

“Unilever has supported that. Kraft and Nestle also canceled contracts with suppliers that aren’t sustainable. Many other companies have committed to holding their contractors responsible for sustainable palm oil. Why can’t Cargill do the same? They are the number one provider in the country.”

Read RAN’s report:


Cargills_Problems_With_Palm_Oil_low

Comments

18 Comments

T-Paw Is A Jerk
Comment posted May 21, 2010 @ 3:11 pm

Another Right Wing Republi-thug corporate entity that shows us they value profits over Our Mother, the Earth.


Jimmy
Comment posted May 21, 2010 @ 9:18 pm

Don’t you think these little brats have medicinal rainforests growing in their basements? And remind me again, why do I give a rat’s ass about the rainforest?


Dave
Comment posted May 24, 2010 @ 6:21 pm

Breaking the law is apparently difficult to understand for our flagship teabagger.


Jimmy
Comment posted May 24, 2010 @ 9:02 pm

You skirted the issue. Why should I be concerned about clear cutting palm trees in Indonesia? Why is it illegal? You can skip the Mother the Earth BS.


Lane
Comment posted May 24, 2010 @ 9:44 pm

Basic earth sciences is apparently difficult to understand for our flagship teabagger as well. As of this moment, he has yet to opine on the ecological disaster unfolding in the Gulf of Mexico, blaming it on socialist leftist global statist democrites …

The loss of biologically diverse rainforests will have ripple effects on the rest of the incredible planet that is Gaia, an intricately-woven complex of ecosystems that make life possible. Because these ripple effects are unpredictable and hard to undo, we have certain laws in place. They need to be enforced.

Mother Earth is also the only home we have.


Lane
Comment posted May 24, 2010 @ 9:55 pm

This concise recap of rainforest facts at http://www.rain-tree.com/facts.htm provides a compelling case for why many of us do “give a rat’s ass” …

I also “give a rat’s ass” about Cargill not being the good corporate citizen that it should be.


Dave
Comment posted May 24, 2010 @ 10:31 pm

“Why is it illegal?”

It’s all right there in the article. Read – it’s good fer lernin!


Jimmy
Comment posted May 24, 2010 @ 10:38 pm

We live on a radioactive rock with a thin film of H20 covering the much of the surface. Over time hydrocarbon matrices replicate and then disintegrate. Water freezes, thaws and flows.

Isn’t it hypocritical to scoff at Christians for their beliefs but then defend violent behavior on the basis of a planetary super entity, especially one that is just a hot damp rock?

If a celestial body is the “Mother” it would certainly be the Sun, not the Earth. The sun nourished the billions of years of plant life that formed into the oil reserves encased in the earth’s crust.

Indonesians can do with the palm forests whatever they wish as far as I am concerned. If it means more delicious and inexpensive popcorn for me, all the better.


Thomas Butler
Comment posted May 25, 2010 @ 2:15 pm

The traditional Holy Trinity of Christianity – The Father, Son and Holy Ghost – has just been replaced by a new trio -

Jimmy, Rudy and Raymond

enjoy your popcorn


Lane
Comment posted May 25, 2010 @ 2:15 pm

The Gaia hypothesis/theory/principle is a way of viewing the Earth as a single organism, no more no less.

We humans are but walking sacs of water supported by a calcium-based frame. We owe our continued existence to that incredibly thin film of biodiversity surrounding our hot, damp rock no more no less.

BTW, palm oil still can’t beat peanut oil that we can grow and make here for that delicious popcorn. I use a certain brand known for the biggest, fluffiest kernels splashed with honest-to-goodness butter, sprinkled with salt and just a tiny dash of chili powder. Heaven!


Jimmy
Comment posted May 26, 2010 @ 2:07 pm

>>>> a way of viewing the Earth as a single organism

Does it matter that the Earth isn’t an organism?

I agree about peanut oil, but someone buys the palm oil so they must prefer it for some other reason. Price or whatever.

My point is that the rainforest provides livelihood to the people that live there. If they choose to cut the trees down, that’s their business.


Lane
Comment posted May 26, 2010 @ 7:17 pm

I am surprised that the know-it-all teabagger doesn’t know that palm oil is in demand because it is one of the very few highly saturated vegetable fats, making it very desirable to use in processed foods. It is a good business for Cargill to be involved in; however, this does NOT excuse Cargill for what it is doing in Indonesia as described in this article. And because Cargill is a Minnesota company, it becomes our concern – at least those of us who care about the bigger picture – unlike this self-centered troll.


The Understory » Cargill’s Lies About Palm Oil
Pingback posted May 27, 2010 @ 7:13 pm

[...] in Indonesia, but I think that this Minnesota Independent article that came out last week, “Minnesota’s Cargill accused of ignoring law in Indonesian palm oil harvest” just about covers it. Indonesia's Rainforests are Key Habitat for [...]


Chelsea
Comment posted June 3, 2010 @ 1:08 pm

General Mills is one of the many American companies that uses palm oil supplied by Cargill. In fact, over 100 of General Mills products, including 97% of their cereals, use palm oil. Did you know that your Cheerios contain rainforest destruction?


Jimmy
Comment posted June 3, 2010 @ 11:15 pm

“And remind me again, why do I give a rat’s ass about the rainforest?”

At least Sean Connery claimed the rainforest would yield a cure for cancer. Without citing another website can anyone provide any rationale for saving the rainforests without mentioning Gaia?


Lane
Comment posted June 5, 2010 @ 2:49 am

J/R/R, why don’t you be a good boy and tell us why you do give a rat’s ass about saving rainforests?


Lane
Comment posted June 7, 2010 @ 12:00 pm

J/R/R, the page at http://www.rain-tree.com/facts.htm is an excellent recap, and no, it doesn’t mention Gaia or Mother Earth.

The rain forests are responsible for up to 30% of the oxygen we breath with the remaining coming from the oceans which are also undergoing tremendous stress. Over half the rainfall in the world occurs in rain forests whose dynamics actually intensify the water cycle. Rain forests are also incredibly efficient in recycling itself as evidenced in Amazonia where the land itself is so poor that a slash-burn area cannot sustain even grasses two or three years later; once destroyed, the rain forest cannot re-establish itself. The list of products and foods we get from rain forests is already long; we still do not yet know what else the rain forest has that can benefit us – and will never know if we destroy it. When handled correctly by the local people, the rain forest is far, far more valuable economically than if it is cut down and replaced by monoculture along with all associated risks – i.e. the potato blight and resulting famine in Ireland. And on and on it goes.


The Understory
Pingback posted July 28, 2010 @ 7:36 pm

[...] the findings in our report and say that our allegations are unfounded, we stand by our findings. Clearing and burning has taken place in the last year at Cargill’s Indo Sawit Kekal (ISK) plantati…, and the lack of proper permits to operate plantations West Kalimantan is rampant. We acknowledge [...]


RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.