A Viewpoint (TNT, 7-2) by David Overton included a serious factual error about the Forest Stewardship Council. His claim that the FSC provides money to ForestEthics, an environmental advocacy organization, is entirely false and reckless. We hope the error was based in the author’s ignorance and was not an intentional inaccuracy.
We’d also like to set the record straight about choices in forest certification. There are, in fact, considerable and substantive differences in the objectives and outcomes of existing programs.
Most environmental organizations, including many advocacy groups, exclusively endorse the FSC because they are able to play a direct role in our standard-setting and governance. In large part because of its inclusive and democratic processes, FSC standards demand high performance, going well beyond what’s required by law.
In exchange for recognition in the green marketplace, FSC-certified landowners agree to rigorous protection of threatened and endangered species, rare old growth and many other components of healthy forest ecosystems.
(Brinkema is president of the Forest Stewardship Council US.)