Comments on: No, Starbucks isn’t behind a new coffee plantation

By: c.f.sidjabat

c.f.sidjabat — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 01:50:48 +0000

I just want to make sure that you are not just want to clearing my forest with illegal logging practice intead of planting coffee. Let’s pay attention on the global warming to save our children. If you need sustainable production of coffee for your product I suggest you to create any cooperation with small farmer in Dairi. Your children are also inherit our mother earth in the future, why not help the poor farmer,oh gosh, GBU.

By: Siel

Siel — Sat, 14 Oct 2006 03:09:45 +0000

Hi Jess –

Maybe you’re right. The deforestation problem in Sumatra seems both so severe and so widespread to me that my thought, in terms of writing this post, was that we can’ blame this instance on Starbucks since there are so many factors, and so many people, involved.

That said, clearly multinationals like Starbucks do play a role in all of this — and could play a role in mitigating it.

As someone who’s never actually been to the area, I obviously have to rely on what I hear from people who’re closer to the issue. Thomas of ForesTrade, in my view, is an excellent source — what ForesTrade does is amazing. So when he said Starbucks really can’t be blamed for this, I took that at face value.

I’ll ask him to weigh in here — I think we’d both be interested in hearing more.

By: Jess

Jess — Thu, 12 Oct 2006 02:48:47 +0000

It shocks me that this Green site is so quickly writing off this issue. Even if it is true that one man will be singlehandedly chopping down 3,000 hectares (7,500 acres) of the oldest and most diverse rainforest on the planet, how could one say that Starbucks is not behind it? Starbucks is this exporter’s main, if not only client. Conveniently for Starbucks, they can point to this Sumatran man as the perpetrator of the illegal logging and continue to purchase through him. Now, aside from the fact that 7,500 acres of destroyed land and habitat brings the entire rainforest a significant way closer to complete extinction (predicted to occur in less than 10 years, http://www.blueplanetbiomes.org/se_asian_rnfrst.htm), let’s look at this act’s implications for the 25 million coffee farmers of the world. World coffee prices are already at a low, making the living conditions for these farmers grim at best. The low price of coffee is DIRECTLY tied to an oversupply, forcing farmers around the globe to sell their coffee for as low as 25 cents/lb (a typical family producing 1800 lbs/yr can make as low as $450 a year). The deforestation in Sumatra delineates an utter refusal by companies like Starbucks to act sustainably about land and about people. To flood the coffee supply even further means to send more people deeper into poverty, malnutrition, and sickness. To destroy 7,500 acres of Pleistocene Age rainforest means that it won’t grow back.
Let’s not let Starbucks off the hook on this one. And let’s make sure we don’t believe them when they call themselves a sustainable coffee company.

By: Siel

Siel — Wed, 11 Oct 2006 16:32:47 +0000

Hey Maya — I picked up the phone to get in touch with ForesTrade — Maybe they’re not so good with email? Safe travels –

By: Maya

Maya — Wed, 11 Oct 2006 15:52:20 +0000

Thanks for the news, Siel…Guess you start to understand the frustrations I have about my own country now ;-) and this is just a piece of the pie…Yeah, I’m aware of Forest Trade, but unfortunately they haven’t responded to my email to meet up in Sumatra since I’m going back very soon. Hmmm…would love to do something with them. Ah…you seem to always have more charms when it comes to contacting people and getting answers :-)

Cheers,