You are on page 1of 142


ESIA Annexes

Annex 1: Approved ESIA TOR ....................................................................................................................... 1 Annex 2: Nursery Environmental & Safety Assessments ............................................................................ 47 Annex 3: Land Documents ......................................................................................................................... 63 Annex 4: GHI Definitions ............................................................................................................................ 74 Annex 5: Bird Species at the Project Site ................................................................................................... 78 Annex 6: Minutes of Public Consultations ................................................................................................. 83

Annex 1: Approved ESIA TOR

SG Sustainable Oils Cameroon Limited

Douala - Cameroon. C/O Dr Isidore Nse TIMTI Tel: 77 89 13 31 / 99 37 07 01 Fax: +1 646 786 40 63 E-mail:

Herakles Farms



JULY 2010


1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 4 2. LEGAL FRAMEWORK AND INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENTS FOR AGRO-INDUSTRIAL PROJECTS ...................................... 6 3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION .............................................................................................. 9 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 THE PROMOTER ............................................................................................................. 9 COMPANYS GOAL .......................................................................................................... 9 PROJECT LOCATION ..................................................................................................... 10 PROJECT CONTEXT ...................................................................................................... 10 PROJECT CONSISTENCY ............................................................................................... 11 PROJECT INVESTMENT .................................................................................................. 18 PROJECT STATUS ......................................................................................................... 18

4. BRIEF PRESENTATION OF THE PROJECT AREA ................................................... 19 4.1 CLIMATE ...................................................................................................................... 19 4.2 RELIEF......................................................................................................................... 19 4.3 SOILS .......................................................................................................................... 19 4.4 HYDROGRAPHY ............................................................................................................ 19 4.5 FLORA AND FAUNA ....................................................................................................... 20 4.6. SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONTEXT .......................................................................................... 21 5. OBJECTIVE OF ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT ............ 22 5.1 5.2. 5.3 5.4 5.5 6.1 6.2 6.3 GENERAL OBJECTIVE ................................................................................................. 22 SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT........ 22 GENERAL METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY .................................................................... 23 GUIDING PRINCIPLES OF THE STUDY ........................................................................... 24 CONDUCT OF THE STUDY ........................................................................................... 25 INSTITUTIONAL AND LEGAL CONTEXT........................................................................... 26 PROJECT DESCRIPTION.............................................................................................. 26 DESCRIPTION OF INITIAL STAGE .................................................................................. 27

6. CONTENTS OF THE STUDY........................................................................................ 26

7. OBLIGATIONS OF THE PROMOTER .......................................................................... 31 8. OBLIGATIONS OF THE CONSULTANT ...................................................................... 31


8.1 8.2. 8.3 8.4 10. 11. 12. 13.

DOCUMENTS ............................................................................................................. 31 CONSULTANTS TEAM ................................................................................................ 32 CONFIDENTIALITY ...................................................................................................... 32 RELATIONS WITH OTHER PARTIES INVOLVED ............................................................... 32 STRUCTURE OF THE FINAL REPORT ................................................................... 33 COMPLETION PERIOD............................................................................................. 36 PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS ...................................................................................... 36 ANNEXES .................................................................................................................. 38

9. STUDY SCHEDULE ...................................................................................................... 33

ANNEX 1: MAP OF THE PROPOSED SGSOC PROJECT AREA .................................................. 39 ANNEX 2: LAND ACQUISITION DOCUMENTS ............................................................................ 40


SG SUSTAINABLE OILS CAMEROON PLC (SGSOC) is based in Douala, Cameroon. The mission of SGSOC is to develop a commercial-grade oil palm project in the Republic of Cameroon. SGSOCs Management has extensive experience in international project development, particularly in Sub-Saharan Africa. In Africa, the Management team has closed nearly USD$2 billion in transactions, including (i) the Global Alumina refinery in Guinea, (ii) the Bujagali hydroelectric project in Uganda, and (iii) SEACOM, which is a sub-marine fiber optic cable providing high-speed internet access to countries in East and Southern Africa. In 2007, the Bujagali power project and SEACOM won the Africa Power Deal of the Year and the African Communications Deal of the Year, respectively, from Euromoney Project Finance Magazine. In 2009, SEACOM was awarded Best Pan African Initiative at the AfricaCom Awards. On September 17, 2009, the Government of Cameroon and SGSOC signed a convention to enable SGSOC to establish and manage an oil palm plantation in The Republic of Cameroon. It is in this context that SGSOC plans to develop an agro-industrial project in Cameroon comprising of the following components: up to 100 000 hectares in Mundemba, Nguti and Toko, within the Ndian and Kupe- Manengouba sub-divisions of the Southwest region; the construction of palm oil mills in Nguti and Mundemba; and a storage facility in Tiko (Fako Division). The main objective of SGSOC is to develop an oil palm project in the Republic of Cameroon to produce commercial grade crude palm oil (CPO), palm kernel oil (PKO) and biodiesel for domestic and export sales based on market conditions. In keeping with Law No. 96/12 of 5 August 1996 relating to environmental management, and in particular its implementing instrument, Order No. 0070/MINEP of April 22, 2005 to define various categories of operations subject to an environmental impact assessment, this type of project (plantation of more than 50 000 ha and the construction of industrial-scale oil mills) belongs to the category operations whose execution is subject to a detailed environmental impact assessment.

Therefore, in order to meet the aforementioned legal requirement, SGSOC will perform a detailed environmental and social impact assessment. The Company solicited for this purpose the services of the Cabinet H & B CONSULTING USA LLC (Consultant), the American subsidiary of H & B CONSULTING, a consulting firm whose wide experience in the domain of environmental impact assessment is recognized by Cameroons Ministry of Environment and Protection of Nature. The purpose of these Terms of Reference (TOR) is to guide the environmental impact study of the agro-industrial project by defining the missions of the Consultant. The Terms of Reference (TOR) comprises the following sections: Introduction; Legal Framework And Institutional Review of Environmental Impact Studies for AgroIndustrial Projects; Project Description; Brief Presentation of the Project Area; Objective of the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment; Contents of the Study; Obligations of the Promoter; Obligations of the Consultant; Study Schedule; Structure of Final Report; Completion Period; Public Consultations; Annexes.

The legal basis for the conduct of environmental impact studies for agro-industrial projects is explained by Law No. 96/12 of August 5, 1996 relating to environmental management. Section 17 of this law states that the promoter or owner of any development, labor, equipment or project that may endanger the environment owing to its dimension, nature or the impact of its activities on the natural environment shall carry out an impact assessment, pursuant to the description of the specifications. This assessment shall determine the direct or indirect incidence of the said project on the ecological balance of the zone where the plant is located or any other region, the physical environment and quality of life of populations and the impact on the environment in general. In order to clarify the implementation of this legal provision, three important instruments were signed: 1) Decree No. 2005/0577/PM of February 23, 2005, which specifies the methods for conducting environmental impact studies. According to Article 11 of this decree, environmental impact assessments must be realized with the participation of the population concerned through consultations and public hearings. 2) Order No. 0070/MINEP of April 22, 2005, which clarifies the various categories of operations whose realization is subject to an environmental impact assessment. 3) Order No. 00001/MINEP of February 13, 2007, which specifies the general contents of the terms of reference for the environmental impact assessments and provides guidelines for its formulation. According to Article 4 of Order No. 0070/MINEP of April 22, 2005, which defines the different categories of operations subject to an environmental impact assessment, agricultural development projects of more than 100 ha is subject to a detailed environmental impact assessment. In view of the foregoing, the new oil mill must comply with Law No. 98/015 of July 14, 1998 relating to establishments classified as dangerous, unhealthy or obnoxious.

Sections 5, 7, 9 and 12 of this law stipulate that the person in charge of a first class establishment must carry out a study on risks in accordance with the methods determined by lawful before initiating such establishment. Furthermore, the Minister in charge of classified establishments delimits a safety zone around such establishments where dwellings and any activity incompatible with their operation are prohibited; any categorized establishment must establish an emergency plan approved by the qualified administration and those generating pollution must auto-monitor their emissions. According to Sections 25 and 26, establishments that pollute the environment are subjected to an annual pollution tax, and those who take actions to protect the environment profit from a deduction on their taxable profit according to the methods stated by the finance law. Law No. 98/015 of July 14, 1998 describes set-up and exploitation methods for dangerous, unhealthy and inconvenient categorized establishments. In its Article 11, the authorization decree lays out the means of analysis and necessary measures to control the establishments auto-monitoring of its effects on the environment. Section 16 (2) of Law No. 94/01 of January 20, 1994, which specifies the forestry, wildlife and fisheries regulations, stipulates that the initiation of any development project that is likely to perturb a forest or aquatic environment shall be subject to a prior study of the environmental hazard. At the International level, the study should provide an assessment of the project as it relates to all issues concerned in the RSPO Guidelines, the IFC Performance Standards & Procedures, the IFC Environmental & Social Review Procedures, The Equator Principles, and ISO 14001:2004. SGSOC is a member of the RSPO. The Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) was formed in 2004 with the objective to promote the growth and use of sustainable oil palm products through credible global standards and engagement of stakeholders. The seat of the association is in Zurich, Switzerland. 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 (Source:

At the institutional level, the ministries directly concerned with this study are: the Ministry of Environment and Protection of Nature, which is responsible for approving the study; the Ministry of Forestry and Wildlife, which is responsible for the management of forest resources on the site; and the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development. At the institutional level, the ministries most concerned with the SGSOC project and the environmental impact assessment are: The Ministry of Environment and Nature Protection (MINEP), which is responsible for approving the environmental impact assessment and monitoring the environmental management plan; The Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MINADER), which ensures the technical supervision of agricultural projects; The Ministry of Commerce (MINCOMMERCE); The Ministry of Energy and Water Resources (MINEE); The Ministry of Public Health (MINSANTE); The Ministry of Forest and Wildlife (MINFOF); The Ministry of Industry, Mines and Technological Development (MINIMIDT); The Ministry of State Property and Land Tenure (MINDAF); and, The Ministry of Labor and Social Security (MINTSS).


3.1 The Promoter

As previously mentioned, the promoter of the project is SGSOC, based in Douala, Cameroon. This company is represented by Dr Isidore Nse Timti (Tel: 77 89 13 31 / 99 37 07 01; Fax: +1 646 786 40 63; E-mail: 3.2 Companys Goal

The Company plans to develop an oil palm project to produce commercial-grade crude palm oil (CPO), palm kernel oil (PKO) and biodiesel for domestic and export sales based on market conditions. The project will include the construction of several nurseries in Nguti and Mundemba, plantations, housing facilities for workers, medical facilities, administrative buildings, warehouses, repair shops, oil extraction mills with an integrated power station, and logistics infrastructure for the transportation and storage of the CPO, PKO and biodiesel. One of the main socio-economic benefits of this project is provision of permanent jobs to the local population. It is expected that up to 9 000 direct jobs will have been created upon completion of the project. These will include labor, engineers, clerical workers, drivers, supervisors, maintenance workers, security guards, senior management staff and other permanent positions. Other benefits of this project include, but are not limited to: rural development; training for employees and out growers; education programs; housing; access to electricity and clean water; healthcare; commercial opportunities for small-and-medium sized enterprises (SMEs); tax revenue for the Government; and, scholarships for local universities.


SGSOC is committed to developing and maintaining sustainable oil palm projects which will have wide reaching benefits for many aspects of the Cameroon economy and the local communities. 3.3 Project Location

The project will be located in the Ndian and Kupe-Muanenguba Divisions of the South-West region of Cameroon, where climatic conditions are conducive for oil palm cultivation. 3.4 Project Context

Palm oil is the worlds main source for vegetable oil and fat. Palm oil surpassed soybean oil as the dominant edible oil in 2005 and has continued to gain market share with respect to other major vegetable oils. Currently, palm oil (32%) and palm kernel oil (4%) together account for 36% of the vegetable oil market. Palm oil consumption worldwide rose from 27.8 to 41.1 million metric tons from 2003 to 2008, which represents a 48% increase during that period. At this rate, palm oil consumption is expected to reach approximately 61 million metric tons by 2013. Graph 1: Consumption Growth: 4 Major Vegetable Oils
(Source: SGSOC Business Plan)

In Cameroon, palm oil consumption was estimated at 182 100 metric tons in 2007/2008, with approximately 30,000 tons of the total having to be imported. As can be seen in Graph 2 below, both consumption and imports have grown over the past several years.



Graph 2: Cameroon: Domestic Consumption and Imports of Palm Oil

(Source: SGSOC Business Plan)

3.5 Project Consistency

According to the SGSOC Business Plan, the project consists of the following components: approximately 80 250 hectares in Mundemba and Nguti in Ndian and Kupe Manengouba Divisions; the construction of palm oil mills in Nguti and Mundemba; construction of a storage area in Tiko (Fako division); and port facilities in Tiko for storing and piping the CPO/PKO onto vessels for export. The Plantations SGSOC plans to develop approximately 80 250 hectares of oil palm in Mundemba, Nguti and Toko areas. Approximately 70 to 80% of the hectares are estimated as suitable for oil palm cultivation, with the remaining land being used for the projects infrastructure. As earlier mentioned, the Mundemba and Nguti areas are conducive for the development of a sustainable commercial grade oil palm project (See Annex 1: Map of the Proposed SGSOC Project Area). SGSOC has employed several experienced agricultural experts to manage and carry out detailed studies to identify land for the oil palm project. The primary leading expert is Dr. Isidore Timti; others include Institut de Recherche Agricole pour le Developpement (IRAD), Agrinexus International (a leading Malaysian oil palm consulting company), and Sigma Consultants (a leading US-based social and environmental firm).



Land Cultivation Plan Due to the large undertaking required for the full development of this project, the investment will require a multi-year build-out. The rate of planting will cover several years. The first few years will allow management time to fully understand the soil conditions, the oil palm production and growth rates, and to provide appropriate training to workers. The initial years will also enable the company to optimize logistics and supply chain procedures to ensure reliable supplies. The nurseries will provide enough seedlings for the planting of approximately 1000 ha in two areas in 2011. A long-term nursery planting program starting with 3 000 ha will be initiated in 2011, and gradually increased in subsequent years. The following illustrates the estimated annual planting for the build out of the project (market conditions, climatic conditions and other variable may cause an increase or decrease in the forecasted plantings):

Year 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Nursery 2 000 5 000 8 000 10 000 10 000 10 000 15 000 15 000

Cumulative Hectares 2 000 7 000 15 000 25 000 35 000 45 000 60 000 75 000



Plantation Development Operations Establishment of nurseries Nurseries for tenera oil palm seeds obtained from IRAD la Dibamba will be established. Both mini bags and large poly bags will be used. The seedlings will remain in large polybags for 12 to 18 months before they are field-planted. Site preparation Nursery sites are to be mechanically prepared using bulldozers and will also be manually cleared. The top soil will be utilized from site in order to fill the polyethylene bags. Field establishment The field will be mechanically and manually cleared using dozers and field labor. Maintenance and harvesting Maintenance will be performed via mechanical slashing using tractors and manual use of machetes. Re-planting Replanting will occur after 25 to 30 years, depending on yields and planting material used. Palm Oil Mill Harvested fresh fruit bunches (FFB) will be processed in an oil extraction mill. This process will involve sterilizing the FFB, thrashing the fruit from bunches, macerating the fruit and pressing the oil from the pulp. The oil will then be filtered and dewatered to produce CPO (crude palm oil). The pulp from the oil extraction process will be further processed to extract the palm nuts from the chaff, and the nuts will then be de-husked to extract the palm kernels. Palm kernels produce two products when crushed: PKO (palm kernel oil), and palm kernel meal, the latter of which is an important ingredient for animal feed. Extraction mills must be located within the production area, as the FFB perish quickly once they are cut from the tree, thereby decreasing the amounts of CPO that can be extracted. Each plantation or group of plantations, including the mill and facilities where the fruits are processed, form the core of oil palm production.



The build-out of the oil extraction mills involves several stages and factors such as: the duration of the nursery and time leading to the production of fruit; the amount of FFB produced per hectare; and the lead time for the manufacture and construction of the extraction mill. Based on discussions with several oil mill manufacturers, it is estimated that the duration from ordering mill parts to commercial operation is 20 to 24 months. Palm Oil Mill Information Issues Comments

Equipment and machines [sterilization reception, weighing station, discharge and storage, sterilization, oil extraction and collection, fruit picking and washing, extraction oil unit, storage, boiler, fuel storage, energy room, electrical installation, (additional installations: water conveyance, sewage treatment and fire safety equipment)] Fabricated items are fabricated based on design and done by sub -contractors. Proprietary items are supplied by 'local agents' or appointed distributors of foreign manufacturers where the proprietary items are manufactured. 2. Non-fabricated items (mainly proprietary) such as sterilizers, steam turbines, decanters, nut crackers, etc. 1. Fabricated items such as reception, storage, conveyors, tanks, etc., and Equipment and machines can be divided into 2 groups:

There are mainly 4 types of 'waste' or by-products from a palm oil mill: 1. Cyclone fibers and shells, which are normally recycled as fuel in the boiler to provide steam for the process and to generate power.



2. EFB Empty Fruit Bunches, which are recycled as organic fertilizer for the field. The EFB can be converted for soil improvement via a process called composting. This process must be done correctly under aerobic conditions, whereby methane is not emitted. The addition of specific compounds Effluent Treatment increases the value of the compost to bio-fertilizer equal in grade to inorganic fertilizer, resulting in an indirect contribution to the environment. EFB can also be made into other products such as long fiber briquettes. It is a good biomass, and since combustion of biomass is carbon neutral, it may qualify as fuel for renewable energy, and potentially replaces fossil fuel.


POME Palm oil mill effluent, which produces methane, can be collected in anaerobic ponds. The POME must be treated in digesters where methane can be captured and cleaned of sulphur and moisture, before feeding to the gas engine to generate electrical power. Another option SGSOC is exploring is the treatment of POME by composting the effluent and solids and using as organic fertilizer. This will decrease the amount of inorganic fertilizer required for the project.



The following diagrams illustrate the process flow charts of a typical mill in operation: PROCESS FLOW

Crop Reception


Transfer Carriage




Crude Oil





Oil Screening

Fat Oil Clarification tank Crude Oil Underflow

Purifiers Centrifuges Sludge

Vacuum Drier

Sludge Pit

CPO Storage Tank

Raw Eflluent Pond

Despatch to Refinery

Effluent Treatment

The Port Site SGSOC will require port facilities for storing and piping the CPO/PKO onto vessels for export. Over the course of the build-out, the Company must construct approximately 20 000 metric tons of tank capacity and associated heating equipment, pumps, piping, fire protection, and ship-loading installations. In the near-term, SGSOC will need storage facilities for importing fertilizer and other capital goods required for the project. Once fully operational, SGSOC forecasts exporting up to 200 000 tons of CPO & PKO, depending on yields and domestic supply. 3.6 Project Investment

SGSOC estimates the total investment for this project to be about US $ 750 million over a 20 to 25-year period. SGSOC would finance, develop, own and operate the project. First planting of the nurseries is scheduled for July/August 2010. 3.7 Project Status

At present, the following aspects of the project have been completed: On September 17, 2009, the Government of Cameroon and SGSOC signed agreements to enable SGSOC to establish and manage oil palm plantations in Cameroon. The Cameroon Government has allocated land to SGSOC. (See Annex 2: Land Acquisition Documents). A soil study was carried out by IRAD. A socio-economic survey was conducted by the NGO, NATURE CAMEROON. Sites have been selected for oil palm nurseries. Consultations with the local population are ongoing.




4.1 Climate

The Southwest region is characterized by the typical Cameroonian-type climate. The rainfall is unimodal and runs from March to October, with the peak being from July to August, up to and including September. Rainfall is more evenly spread out in the Meme, Kupe-Manengumba and Fako divisions. The Fako and Ndian divisions have the highest rainfall. The average annual rainfall ranges from 2 445 to 3 560 mm, spread over 150 days. The dry season lasts from November to March, with December, January and February being the driest months. The mean average temperature is 23 C, with an average maximum of 30 and a minimum of 21 C. Temperatures are higher in the Mamfe, Mundemba, Eyomojock and Muyuka subdivisions. 4.2 Relief

The project zone is mainland lowland, with the altitude ranging from below 200 meters to 1 201 meters above sea level. 49 817.7 hectares of the project area are below 500 meters, and 34 984.3 hectares are above 500 meters (Source: Agrinexus). 4.3 Soils The soils of the project zones are dominated by rudimentary sandy clay loam, which are low in water retention, with a mean organic content of 1.5% and a ph of 5.6. This soil type is particularly favorable for cocoa, rubber and oil palm cultivation. 4.4 Hydrography

The hydrographic net of the forest area in Nguti is made up of the River Bake and its affluents. The Bake River originates from the Nkwende Hills and flows in a southerly direction to the south of Osirayib village. Downstream, the Bakebe River joins the Bake River near Ayong village. The Bake River continues to flow in a north-westerly direction. Three upper tributaries of the Cross River also drain the BMWS, the Mbu or Mbe, the Mfi-Mie and Bashuwe.



Major drainage systems in the Ndian Division (Mundemba) include: 1) Ndian River System. Flows in a southwest direction, drains the northern parts of the Rumpi Hills Forest Reserve through its tributaries: Idu, Moliba, Mana, Oweye, Okporo and Nyangoribe. The western and southwestern areas of the Park are also drained by the Akpasang and Korup Rivers, flowing generally southwards (Source: Management Plan of Korup National park and its Peripheral Zone 2008-2012). 2) Moko River System. Drains the southern part of the Rumpi Hills Forest Reserve through its tributaries: Dokeri, Massombi, Nyagorobe and Melange.

3) Bake-Munaya River System. Drains the central and northern parts of the Support Zone of Korup National Park through tributaries such as the: Libangenie, Maili, Marube, Ma, Mameli, Mohib, Bakwe, Bagodo, Bayong Ayib, Bate, Akarem, Akam and also flows north as a tributary of the Cross River (Source: Management Plan of Korup National park and its Peripheral Zone 2008-2012).

4.5 Flora and Fauna

The zone is considered to be rich in both flora and fauna. The lowlands of the region are known for their high diversity. Within the framework of efforts to preserve this biological wealth, the Government has set-up protected areas in the zone, including the Korup National Park. A High Conservation Value Forest (HCVF) study is not part of the EIA Consultants work scope. SGSOC will contract with a certified RSPO consultant to perform the HCVF Study once the EIA is completed. SGSOC believes providing the EIA to the HCVF consultant prior to that consultants study will improve the quality and efficiency of the HCVF study. The natural vegetation of the project zone is lowland evergreen forest of low and medium altitude dominated by the Caesalpiniaceae family. Most of the timber species in the zone have been harvested.



The project area is covered by secondary forests. 4.6. Socio-economic Context The project area includes 38 villages with populations ranging from thousands in some villages (e.g. Manyemen 6,000 persons) to 10 persons in others (e.g.: Lobe). Their main economic activity is farming. A large number of villages have no running water, electricity, health infrastructure, or schools.




5.1 General Objective

The general objective of the study is to evaluate the potential impacts of the project on the physical, biological and socio-economic environment, and to propose preventive, mitigating and compensatory measures to minimize the potential negative impacts, as well as to increase the positive impacts. 5.2.

Specific Objectives of the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment

Article 5 of Decree No. 2005/0577/PM of February 23, 2005 provides methods for conducting environmental impact assessments. According to this decree, such assessment must contain the following elements: - A summary; - A description and analysis of the initial state of the site and its physical, biological, socioeconomic and human environment; - A description and analysis of all the elements, natural resources and, socio-cultural elements likely to be affected by the project, as well as the reasons for the choice of site; - The projects description and reasons for its choice among the other possible solutions; - The identification and evaluation of possible effects of the projects implementation on the natural and human environment; - The indication of measures designed to avoid, reduce or eliminate detrimental effects from the project on the environment; - A sensitization and information program, as well as the statements from the meetings held with the public, non-governmental organizations, trade unions, key informants and other organized groups concerned with the project; - An environmental management plan comprising the projects monitoring mechanisms and its environmental follow-up and, if necessary, the compensation plan and emergency plan; and, - The studys terms of reference as well as the bibliographical references.



The specific objectives of the environmental impact assessment include: - Presentation of the legal environmental framework applicable; - Description of the project (promoter, objective, location, sites, capacity, activity of preconstruction and construction, timeline, manpower, installations and services, exploitation activities and maintenance, investment, etc); - Description of the initial state and environment analyzes (physical, biological, socio-economic); - Alternative analyses, including a review of compliance with RSPO and IFC standards for oil palm plantations; - A thorough impact analysis, including identification and evaluation of the impacts on environmental components (climate, air, water, soils, flora, fauna and human environment); - Identification of attenuation measures and evaluation of their costs; - Development of an Environmental Management Plan. 5.3 General Methodology of the Study

The Consultant is required to clearly describe each of the methods and tools to be used to collect and process data. The Consultant shall examine the interactions between project factors that cause hazards and the aspects of the environment so affected, excluding aspects that have little or no relevance to the environmental impacts of the action. The Consultant will identify the elements of the biophysical and social environment that can be affected by the project and which are the object of public and/or commercial concern. The Consultant will identify all of the potential impacts of the project on the environment and evaluate them using a methodology that enables their classification by order of importance. Only major impacts will be further examined. The Consultant will then propose realistic mitigation and monitoring measures. The study will propose a project management plan, including a plan for managing waste produced by the project. Special attention should be given to the sensitization of the population located in the project zone, as well as environmental protection and safety of machine operators, laborers using chemicals, and vehicle drivers in the project site. The Consultant will evaluate risks related to the project and propose emergency measures. The Consultant will propose response elements with regard to project feasibility from an environmental and social standpoint.




Guiding Principles of the Study

This environmental impact assessment will be based on a number of principles, notably: The principle of sustainable development: Sustainable development seeks to meet the basic needs of present generations without compromising the ability of future generations to meet theirs. It is therefore based on the principles of equity, not only towards future generations, but also towards present generations, irrespective of their origin. The precautionary principle, whereby in the absence of certainty, and given the scientific and technical knowledge at the time, there should not be a delay in the adoption of effective and proportionate measures to prevent potential severe and irreversible damage to the environment at an economically acceptable cost. The polluter pays principle, according to which the costs of prevention, pollution reduction and control measures and the restoration of contaminated sites are borne by the polluter. The principle of accountability, whereby any person who, through his / her action creates conditions that affect human health and the environment, is required to ensure their elimination under proper conditions to avoid such effects.

The principle of participation, whereby:

every citizen should have access to information relating to the environment, including those relating to hazardous substances and activities;

every citizen has a duty to ensure the protection of the environment and to contribute to its protection;

every public or private person should, in all activities, comply with these requirements;



every decision concerning the environment should be taken after consultation with the sectors or groups concerned or after public discussion when those concerned have a general scope.

The principle of subsidiary, whereby in the absence of a written general or special rule of law relating to environmental protection, the identified customary norm of a given area considered to be effective with regard to environmental protection, shall apply.


Conduct of the Study

The study shall be carried out in accordance with the Decree No. 2005/0577/PM of February 23, 2005, which regulates the conduct of environmental impact assessments and Order No. 0070/MINEP of April 22, 2005, which specifies the different categories of operations subject to environmental impact assessments.




In line with Order No. 0070/MINEP of April 22, 2005, which specifies the different categories of operations subject to environmental impact assessments, the content of the environmental and social impact assessment (ESIA) will be as follows: Non-technical summary This section will present an overview of the studys contents. This summary will present the goals of the project; describe all the project components from the technical standpoint, identify the main environmental impacts, as well as key mitigation and improvement measures envisaged. This abstract will be in French and English. 6.1

Institutional and Legal Context

The Consultant will present the legal and institutional context in which the study will be carried out. SGSOC will justify the project and will present the project sponsor, indicate the sector of activity of the project, and describe the context of the project to situate it in its environment. This presentation will help identify the environmental, socio-economic and technical stakes of the project at the local, regional, national and even international levels. 6.2

Project Description

The Consultant will briefly present: The project, providing an operational description of the relevant components of the project; The project promoter or owner and the main activities to be carried out; The infrastructure required within the framework of the project; The number, types and sources of labor required and recruitment procedure, etc; The location of the infrastructure to be put in place; The technical characteristics of the project; Wastes and hazards likely to be produced by the project; A detailed description of various phases of the project; and,



The types and quantities of all materials that will be part of the project, their origin and method of production.


Description of Initial Stage

This section will define the study area and describe the components of the natural and human environment. (a) Delimitation of study area To limit the amount of information to be collected and analyzed, and to focus on relevant aspects with concrete and realistic proposals, the Consultant should set limits. Such limits should be based on the maximum possible interaction between the project and the environment. The study should justify the limits adopted and distinguish between areas of direct impact from those of indirect impact on the natural and human environments. The main limitations to be set are: spatial, temporal and legal elements, ecosystem and social elements. (b) Description of relevant environmental aspects The study will, on the basis of available data, supplement if necessary appropriate quantitative and qualitative inventories, as much as possible present a factual description of relevant environmental components with respect to project stakes and impacts. This description will highlight: - The state of the environment at the time of carrying out the study; - Relevant information about changes likely to occur during the projects life span; and, - Relevant information on environmental changes in the absence of the project. For example, the following will be covered: - The physical environment: geology, topography, soils, climate and meteorology, surface and ground hydrology, hydrodynamics, current sources of air pollution, liquid pollution load, water quality (physicochemical parameters, suspended particles, etc.) in the receiving medium;



- The biological environment: flora, fauna, rare species, sensitive habitats, natural sites of special interest, species of commercial value and potentially harmful species or those serving as vectors; and, - The socio-economic and cultural environment: demography, population, ethnic groups, local minority groups, languages, activities, community structure, employment, skills, know-how, land use, distribution of incomes, goods and services, traditions, cultural heritage, development activities earmarked or underway, socio-economic infrastructure. 6.4 Anticipated Environmental Impacts The identification of impacts seeks to determine how the project may affect environmental elements. This section must be discussed with all parties concerned. (a) Identification The study will identify the most significant impacts. At this stage, an impacts identification matrix and checklists should be used. These impacts include: Degradation of the living environment and conditions of the population living near the project area; Degradation of vegetation and increased pressure on natural resources, social infrastructure and the biophysical and socio-economic environment; Reduction of land and aquatic biodiversity, ecosystem degradation and alteration of the hydrodynamics of the environment; and, Improvement of the quality of life of the local people.

(b) Characterization Once the study will establish that an impact is likely to occur, that impact must be characterized. In this context, it will consider the positive and negative, direct and indirect and, where appropriate, the cumulative, synergistic, latent, reversible and irreversible impacts related to the proposed works. To describe the impact, the Consultant will use the following aspects: - Nature of impact; - Cause of impact; - Specific interaction with environment;


- Intensity or scope of impact; - Extent of impact; - Duration of impact; - Frequency of impact; and, - Occurrence. (c) Evaluation of importance of impact The study will assess the significance of impacts and describe their nature and groups / areas affected using appropriate methods. Special attention should be paid to impacts with high importance. (d) Impact indicators The study will present the indicators of each impact and how to measure and monitor them. For impacts that cannot be quantified, the study will describe them in detail, highlighting the causes and manifestations. (e) Environmental impact sheet For each impact identified, the Consultant will prepare an impact sheet containing the following information: - Description and location of impact identified; - Source of impact; - Brief description of the causes and manifestations of the impact; - Characterization of impact; - Evaluation of the (absolute and relative) importance of the impact; - Appropriate environmental measure (type, efficiency and principle); and, - Evaluation of the residual impact.



6.5 Mitigation, Compensation and Optimization The study will identify corrective and additional actions earmarked in different phases of the project to eliminate or reduce the negative impacts identified, and will propose measures designed to promote or maximize their positive impact. It will also present an evaluation of the effectiveness of the mitigation; compensation and optimization measures proposed and estimate their cost. The study will evaluate the residual impacts by making a projection of mitigation measures. In the case of unavoidable and irreducible residual impacts, the study will propose compensation measures for the biological environment or communities affected. 6.6 Environmental and Social Management Plan The Consultant will prepare the Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) of the project, including environmental measures to be implemented, budget estimates, the implementation schedule, needs in terms of personnel and resources and any other support required for implementation, mitigation and compensation measures. (a) Institutional requirements for the implementation of ESMP The Consultant will assess the capacity of stakeholders, particularly those in the affected communities, to implement the ESMP and, where necessary, prescribe capacity building to enable the implementation of management and monitoring plans. (b) Monitoring and Surveillance Program: The study will indicate the monitoring parameters to be used by control agencies and actors and the cost of the operation. (c) Program for the Implementation of Measures: The Consultant will propose a program for the implementation of measures. Accordingly, the Consultant will classify the measures formulated in order of priority. Priority will be given to measures related to direct and long/short-term impacts. The Consultant will identify and characterize the actors and institutions capable of implementing the proposed measures and, where necessary, the steps to be taken to strengthen or expand them.



6.7 Cost Estimates To enable the implementation of the ESMP, the study will estimate the costs of recommended mitigation and compensation measures, as well as the costs of compliance with all relevant Government decrees specified in this document. 6.8 Public Participation Public participation in the conduct of the study is a crucial component of the study. The ESMP must be discussed with all parties and stakeholders concerned. The Consultant will comply with the procedure of consultations and public hearings as prescribed by Section III of Decree No. 2005/0577/PM of February 23, 2005, which specifies rules for the conduct of environmental impact assessments. The Consultant will assist the Promoter in organizing public hearings in keeping with the regulations in force.


The Promoter will place at the disposal of the Consultant, free of charge, all plans, studies and available information relating to the project or project area.




The Consultant will prepare an inventory of all documents placed at the Consultants disposal by the Promoter or produced during the mission for study purposes. The documents in the Consultants keeping will be returned at the end of the mission. The Consultant will analyze and interpret data deemed to be confidential, and will not use the Promoters information for purposes other than the conduct of this study.




Consultants Team

The Consultant will put together the necessary human resources in terms of quantity and quality to produce quality work. The composition of the team and duration of the participation of each team member will be determined by the Consultant. However, the following minimum skills will be required in the team: The operational team of the Consultant will include qualified staff with proven expertise in environmental and social impact assessment. The team shall include environmental management specialists, an expert in safety management and risk prevention, a biodiversity expert, an agronomist, a socio-economist, a zoologist, a botanist, resources experienced in Public Consultations, a Hygiene Safety - Environment (HSE) trainee, an administrative assistant and support staff. 8.3


The Consultant will be bound to maintain confidentiality of the Promoters identity and business during and after the Consultants mission. 8.4

Relations with Other Parties Involved

The Consultant will have to work closely with all parties involved in the environmental impact assessment, in particular the central and external services of the Ministry of Environment and Nature Protection (MINEP), the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural development (MINADER), officials the Korup National Park.




The maximum period for the completion of the study is three months. The reports of the study will be submitted as follows: To + 8 weeks: interim report in two (2) hard copies with an electronic version; To + 12 weeks: final report incorporating all comments and remarks made by the Promoter in twentyfive (25) copies with an electronic version.


The reports will be drafted in English. The Consultant will give the Promoter a hard copy and an electronic copy of the report. The report will be concise and will highlight major environmental issues. The Promoter will be responsible for producing the report in the required number of copies for submission to the competent authorities. The report will include the following: - A summary of the study in simple language, both in French and English; - An introduction of and justification for the study; - The legal and regulatory framework relevant to the study; - A description of the project; - A presentation and analysis of options; - The reasons for selecting the project among the options; - A description and analysis of the initial state of the site and its physical, biological, socioeconomic and human environment; - A description and analysis of all socio-cultural and natural resources that could be affected by the project; - The reasons for selecting the site; - An identification and evaluation of possible effects of the implementation of the project on the natural and human environment;



- An identification of measures adopted to prevent, reduce or eliminate the projects adverse effects on the environment; - An environmental and social management plan comprising mechanisms for project surveillance and environmental monitoring; - A conclusion; - References; and, - Appropriate annexes, including: o Terms of reference of the study and the letter from the MINEP (Ministry of Environment and Protection of Nature); o Minutes of meetings with communities, NGOs, trade unions, opinion leaders and other organized groups involved in the project; o Lists of persons consulted; and, o Names of those who carried out the study. The study will determine the projects impacts on the environment. At this stage, the Consultant is required to use an impact identification matrix or checklists. Once the study establishes the potential impacts, those impacts shall be characterized. In this context, the Consultant will consider the direct and indirect positive and negative impacts and, where appropriate, the cumulative, reversible and irreversible impacts related to the tasks envisaged. The study will characterize the various impacts drawing on the following criteria: - The nature of each impact; - The intensity or scope of each impact; - The interaction with the environment and / or local communities caused by each impact; - The extent of each impact; - The duration of each impact; - The frequency of each impact; and, - The reversibility of each impact. The significance of each impact should be assessed using an appropriate method explained in the previous pages of this document.



Impact Mitigation, Compensation and Optimization Regarding negative impacts, the study will identify and propose preventive or mitigation measures taking into account the project size and duration. Preference will be given to preventive measures in accordance with the principle of prevention prescribed by the framework law. The proposed measures should be realistic and take into account variables such as financial and technical capacities of the party responsible for implementation. Concerning positive impacts, the study will propose enhancement measures. The proposed measures should be realistic and should focus on long-term sustainable solutions. Cost estimates of environmental measures The Consultant will estimate the costs of implementing the environmental measures envisaged. Environmental Management Plan On the basis of the impacts identified and environmental measures recommended, the Consultant will prepare an Environmental Management Plan (EMP), including for each major impact: - The proposed environmental measures; - The objectives of the measures; - The actions to be implemented to achieve the objectives; - The schedule of implementation of the actions; - The costs of measures; - Objectively verifiable indicators; - Implementing actors; and, - Surveillance and monitoring actors.



Emergency Response Plan The Consultant will examine the projects risks and develop a corresponding Emergency Response Plan. That plan will be structured as follows: -

Introduction; Objectives of the Risk Management; Risk Factors; Identifications and Analysis of Risks; Management of workers and sub-contractors; Emergency Risk Prevention Plan; and, Specific Risk Management Structure.


The completion period of this environmental impact study is estimated to be 60 to 75 business days.


Within the framework of the environmental impact study considered, administrative and traditional authorities, persons in charge of the engineering services, NGOs intervening in the zone, concerned populations and any other stakeholders or interested parties will be consulted. The present section specifies the objectives of the aforesaid consultations, the strategy, as well as the time frame.



The public consultations have the following aims: To present the Company to the various stakeholders and allow them to fully understand its project plan and activities to provide a more detailed understanding of its impacts;

To allow recipients to express and share their concerns with respect to the project; To collect relevant information to take into account in conducting the Environmental Impact Study; To complete the identification of impacts and consider the interested parties, correction measurements and efficient compensation adapted to the local context; and, To engage local populations in dialogue on optimizing the projects advantages for the local population.

Individual and group meetings have been considered with the recipients. Below is the program for the group consultations.




CENTRAL ADMINISTRATION CONSULTATIONS (YAOUND) The Administrations (MINEP, From September 20th to September 24th, 2010 MINIMIDT, MINADER, MINCOMMERCE, MINEE, MINSANTE, MINDAF, MINFOF , MINTSS) RESIDENTS CONSULTATIONS September 28th, 2010 September 30th, 2010 Populations NGUTI VILLAGES Populations MUNDEMBA VILLAGES Nguti City Hall Mundemba City Hall Yaound (in their respective administration)



Annex 1: Map of the Proposed SGSOC Project Area Annex 2: Land Acquisition Documents



Annex 1: Map of the Proposed SGSOC Project Area



Annex 2: Land acquisition documents











Annex 2: Nursery Environmental & Safety Assessments


SG Sustainable Oils Cameroon Limited

Douala - Cameroon. C/O Dr Isidore Nse TIMTI Tel: 77 89 13 31 / 99 37 07 01 Fax: +1 646 786 40 63 E-mail:

Herakles Farms


ANNEX I: Analysis of Environmental Parameters



H & B Consulting USA

Environmental Consultants

Immeuble HAJAL CENTER 6Th Floor Suite 604 P O Box 2986 Yaound Cameroon (237) 22 22 38 90 (237) 99 92 67 07

4800 Hampden Lane - Suite 200 Bethesda, MD 20814 Phone : 1-240-752-1564 Fax : 1-240-482-3759




1. Water Analysis ......................................................................................................... 3 1.1. 1.2. 1.3. 1.4. Nguti Nursery site (Abandonned) Water Analysis Results Nloa River.............. 4 Talangaye Nursery site (Nguti Block) Water Analysis Results Bakube River ... 5 Lipenja I Nursery site (Mundemba Block) Water Analysis results Mowri River 6 Conclusion.......................................................................................................... 7

2. Soil Analysis ............................................................................................................ 8 2.1. 2.2. Talangaye Nursery site (Nguti Block) ............................................................... 11 Lipenja I Nursery site (Mundemba Block) ......................................................... 12

3. Noise Evaluation .................................................................................................... 13 3.1. 3.2. Talangaye Nursery site (Nguti Block) ............................................................... 14 Lipenja I Nursery site (Mundemba Block) ......................................................... 15

PHOTOS Photo 1: NLOA River in Nguti ....................................................................................... 3 Photo 2: MOWRI River in Lipenja I................................................................................ 3 Photos 3: Soil Sampling .............................................................................................. 10 Photos 4: Soil Sampling Lipenja I ............................................................................ 10


1. Water Analysis Water samples were taken at the rivers next to the nursery sites. Because the nurseries will use water pumped directly from those rivers, we did some analysis to determine the quality of the water. Water is an essential resource for living systems, industrial processes, agricultural production and domestic use. The principal factors that are taken into consideration when determining water quality are:

turbidity acidity & alkalinity trace elements and nutrients such as nitrogen, phosphorus, halogens (chloride and fluoride ions), alkali metals (sodium and potassium ions), calcium and magnesium ions etc....

Photo 1: NLOA River in Nguti

Photo 2: MOWRI River in Lipenja I The water samples were analyzed at the Centre Pasteur du Cameroun and below are the results.


1.1. Nguti Nursery site (Abandonned) Water Analysis Results Nloa River


1.2. Talangaye Nursery site (Nguti Block) Water Analysis Results Bakube River


1.3. Lipenja I Nursery site (Mundemba Block) Water Analysis results Mowri River


1.4. Conclusion From the results of the analysis of the three (03) samples (NLOA, BAKUBE, and MOWRI) by the Centre Pasteur de Yaound, the water was found to colored and free of contaminants. Only the sample (BAKUBE) from Talangaye (Nguti) has a high level of Total Suspended Solids (TSS). Total suspended solids (TSS) give a measure of the turbidity of the water. The water from the BAKUBE River needs to be treated before consumption.


2. Soil Analysis Soil samples, next to the rivers, were taken to be analyzed for the presence of hydrocarbons. This was done because pumps will be placed next to the rivers to help transport water to the nursery sites. These pumps will use generators that will be using fuel containing hydrocarbons. The Petro-Flag field tests are based on EPA (Environmental Protection Agency of USA) laboratory methods 8015 B and 418.1. (see Petro-Flag Comparison with laboratory Methods note that is given below). These methods cover probably the widest range of Hydrocarbons that ranges from 9 carbon atoms to 40 (see the subsequent enclosed chart which shows the detection capability of the EPA test 418.1.)


418.1 EPA test and its effective spectrum expressed in terms of atoms of Carbon


Photos 3: Soil Sampling

Photos 4: Soil Sampling Lipenja I


2.1. Talangaye Nursery site (Nguti Block)


2.2. Lipenja I Nursery site (Mundemba Block)


3. Noise Evaluation
Noise or sound that eludes is a continuously variable air pressure, striking the human ear drum, over a span of time

easy description, further, at very short intervals of time these variable air pressures frequently are length of a very loud sound, of say 1/10 000 of a second, will never even be

not perceived. An extremely short

perceived by the ear or in other words not heard. To facilitate a rational and easily describable description of sound an entity called Leq or Equivalent Level of Acoustic Pressure is employed for this purpose. Leq is therefore, described as the mean, continuous and stable acoustic pressure expressed in dB extending over a time interval t2 t1. In environmental work, the frequencies which are of interest are those that are perceived by the human ear. This range of frequencies extends between extreme limits of 100 and 20 000 hertz ; frequencies below that and above this range are called infrasound and ultrasound respectively. The infrasound can better be felt rather than heard and the ultrasound cannot be heard at all or felt. All the frequencies that are of interest to environment are generally designated by the letter A in brackets, (A), to distinguish them from other type of measurements of noise levels. For the acceptable noise levels to human beings expressed in dB and consisting of frequencies perceived by the human ear, we use the recommendations of the World Bank because the Legislative Text of Cameroon, with reference to acceptable levels of noise in different situations, are not yet fully formulated ( though some Labor Code safe working conditions specifications mention a figure of 85 dB as being the maximum acceptable limit in the work place. See Arrete 39/MTPS/IMT Art 41 ). The maximum noise level outside the perimeter fence of the facility ( expressed in dB Leq. (A) ) which are not defined in Cameroon Legislation but are defined by the World Bank are: In Industrial Zone: In Residential Zone: 70 dB (A) 55 dB (A) 45 dB (A) 24 hours 7.00 22.00 hours 22.00 7.00 hours

The purpose of these readings was to determine the level of the noise in that area by the waters. The readings were done using the sound level meter Piccolo.


3.1. Talangaye Nursery site (Nguti Block)

LeqPeriod 8 sec L95% 59,0 L99% 59,0 Leq 60,6 SEL 69,6 Lmax 61,4 Lmin 59,7 L1% 61,0 L5% 60,5 L10% 59,0 L50% 59,0 L90%

Lmedian 59,0

Lmean StdDev 59,1 0,48


3.2. Lipenja I Nursery site (Mundemba Block)

LeqPeriod 19 sec L95% L99% 61,0 61,0 Leq SEL 62,1 74,9 Lmedian 61,0 Lmax 63,6 Lmean 61,1 Lmin L1% 60,9 63,0 StdDev 0,32 L5% 61,0 L10% 61,0 L50% 61,0 L90% 61,0


Annex 3: Land Documents












Annex 4: GHI Definitions


Synopsis taken from Integrating Global and local values: A review of biodiversity assessment, Vermeulen and Koziell, 2002




Annex 5: Bird Species at the Project Site



Common name Cattle Egret Black Kite African Fish Eagle Palm-nut Vulture African Harrier Hawk White-spotted Flufftail African Green Pigeon Blue-headed Wood Dove Tambourine Dove Blue-spotted Wood Dove Red-eyed Dove Common Sand Piper Grey Parrot Green Turaco Great Blue Turaco Yellow-billed Turaco Dusky Long-tailed Cuckoo African Emerald Cuckoo Klaas's Cuckoo Didric Cuckoo Yellowbill Senegal Coucal Cassin's Spinetail African Palm Swift Little Swift Woodland Kingfisher Little Bee-eater Red-billed Dwarf Hornbill African Pied Hornbill

Scientific name Bubulcus ibis Milvus migrans Haliaeetus vocifer Gypohierax angolensis Polyboroides typus Sarothrura pulchra Treron calva Turtur brehmeri Turtur tympanistria Turtur afer Streptopelia semitorquata Actitis hypoleucos Psittacus erithacus Tauraco persa Corythaeola cristata Tauraco macrorhynchus Cercococcyx mechowi Chrysococcyx cupreus Chrysococcyx klaas Chrysococcyx caprius Ceuthmochares aereus Centropus senegalensis Neafrapus cassini Cypsiurus parvus Apus affinis Halcyon senegalensis Merops pusillus Tockus camurus Tockus fasciatus


Abundance Abundant abundant Rare Uncommon Uncommon Rare Common Uncommon Uncommon Common Common Rare Uncommon Rare Uncommon Quite Common Rare Uncommon Uncommon Uncommon Uncommon Quite Common Rare abundant abundant Quite Common Uncommon Uncommon Quite Common



Piping Hornbill White-thighed Hornbill Black-and-white-casqued Hornbill Black-casqued Wattled Hornbill Speckled Tinkerbird Red-rumped Tinkerbird Yellow-throated Tinkerbird Yellow-rumped Tinkerbird Yellow-spotted Barbet Hairy-breasted Barbet Yellow-billed Barbet Square-tailed Saw-wing Lesser Striped Swallow Barn Swallow Blue Cuckoo-Shrike Little Greenbul Little Grey Greenbul Ansorge's Greenbul Yellow-whiskered Greenbul Honeyguide Greenbul Spotted Greenbul Simple Greenbul Swamp Palm Bulbul Xavier's Greenbul Red-tailed Bristlebill Lesser Bristlebill Eastern Bearded Greenbul Red-tailed Greenbul Common Bulbul Forest Robin White-tailed Ant Thrush Chattering Cisticola White-chinned Prinia Buff-throated Apalis Yellow-browed Camaroptera

Bycanistes fistulator Bycanistes albotibialis Bycanistes cylindricus Ceratogymna atrata Pogoniulus scolopaceus Pogoniulus atroflavus Pogoniulus subsulphureus Pogoniulus bilineatus Buccanodon duchaillui Tricholaema hirsuta Trachyphonus purpuratus Psalidoprocne nitens Hirundo abyssinica Hirundo rustica Coracina azurea Andropadus virens Andropadus gracilis Andropadus ansorgei Andropadus latirostris Baeopogon indicator Ixonotus guttatus Chlorocichla simplex Thescelocichla leucopleura Phyllastrephus xavieri Bleda syndactyla Bleda notata Criniger chloronotus Criniger calurus Pycnonotus barbatus Stiphrornis erythrothorax Neocossyphus poensis Cisticola anonymus Schistolais leucopogon Apalis rufogularis Camaroptera superciliaris


Uncommon Uncommon Uncommon Uncommon Uncommon Quite Common Quite Common Quite Common Quite Common Rare Quite Common Quite Common Quite Common abundant Rare Quite Common Uncommon Uncommon Quite Common Uncommon Quite Common Uncommon Uncommon Uncommon Uncommon Uncommon Uncommon Uncommon Common Rare Rare Common Quite Common Uncommon Rare



Olive-green Camaroptera Yellow Longbill Green Crombec Lemon-bellied Crombec Green Hylia African Paradise Flycatcher Red-bellied Paradise Flycatcher Chestnut Wattle-eye Scarlet-spectacled Wattle-eye Brown Illadopsis Collared Sunbird Blue-throated Brown Sunbird Olive-bellied Sunbird Superb Sunbird Yellow White-eye Western Black-headed Oriole Black-shouldered Puffback Lhder's Bush Shrike Western Nicator Velvet-mantled Drongo Pied Crow Purple Glossy Starling Grey-headed Sparrow Black-necked Weaver Vieillot's Black Weaver Village Weaver Blue-billed Malimbe Yellow-mantled Whydah Red-headed Antpecker White-breasted Negrofinch Orange-cheeked Waxbill Common Waxbill Bronze Mannikin Black-and-white Mannikin Black-crowned Waxbill

Camaroptera chloronota Macrosphenus flavicans Sylvietta virens Sylvietta denti Hylia prasina Terpsiphone viridis Terpsiphone rufiventer Dyaphorophyia castanea Platysteira cyanea Illadopsis fulvescens Anthreptes collaris Nectarinia cyanolaema Nectarinia chloropygia Nectarinia superba Zosterops senegalensis Oriolus brachyrhynchus Dryoscopus senegalensis Laniarius luehderi Nicator chloris Dicrurus modestus Corvus albus Lamprotornis purpureus Passer griseus Ploceus nigricollis Ploceus nigerrimus Ploceus cucullatus Malimbus nitens Euplectes macrourus Parmoptila woodhousei Nigrita fusconota Estrilda melpoda Estrilda astrild Lonchura cucullata Lonchura bicolor Estrilda nonnula


Uncommon Common Common Uncommon Quite Common Common Common Common Common Uncommon Uncommon Uncommon Common Rare Rare Uncommon Rare Rare Quite Common Quite Common Common Quite Common Quite Common Uncommon abundant abundant Rare Rare Uncommon Uncommon Common Common Common Common Uncommon



Note: Species listed by CITES but by IUCN as least concern are listed here but are not of comparable conservation status to Red-Listed species


Annex 6: Minutes of Public Consultations














Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SG Sustainable Oils Cameroon LTD Public Consultations Development and Conservation Organizations, Local NGOs, Regional Delegates of the different Ministries and PAMOL
Date: 27/09/10 Time: 10:20-1:30 Place: Chariot Hotel, Buea Attendees: See attendance sheet Mrs. Haman Bako: Welcome participants and regretted the fact that some invited governmental departments did not show up until the time she was about to start the meeting. She continued by telling the participants the main purpose of the meeting was to improve the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) through their constructive inputs. She stated the TORs were approved by MINEP and was the basis for the ESIA and that copies were available for consultations. She then gave the floor to Dr. Timti to the present the project. Dr. Timti began by introducing SG Sustainable Oil Cameroon Limited (SGSOC), a subsidiary of Herakles Farms, and its project. The mission of SGSOC includes the following: develop an environmentally and social sustainable oil palm project in Cameroon; provide commercial grade palm oil for local and external markets- Cameroon imported 100,000 tons in 2009; produce value added biodiesel for internal use; improve social programs / amenities in the rural areas; encourage out growersmodern agronomic practices and improved planting materials; and creation of long term skilled sustainable jobs to reduce unemployment (at full build-out, the project would employ about .05% of the total population of Cameroon), poverty and rural exodus. Dr. Timti also provided information regarding palm oil statistics such as: being the main source of vegetable oil accounting for 36% of vegetable oil in the market; it surpassed soybean as the dominant edible oil since 2005; Consumption worldwide rose by 48% from 2003 to 2008, from 28 million tons to 41 million tons; consumption is estimated to reach 61 million tons in 2013; in 2008 there was a consumption estimated at 182,000 million tons with a net deficit of 30,000 million tons (imports); and this year, 2010, Cameroon is in deficit of more than 100,000 million tons. Herakles Farms management team is committed to the highest standards of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) which has been demonstrated by the track record of Founder and CEO, Bruce J Wrobel, who has led several economic development projects throughout Africa which includes: Bujagali Hydroelectric Dam in Uganda- this project won the Africa Power Deal of the Year in 2007; In 2009, Mr. Wrobel won the Africa Investor, International Business Leader of the Year Award and launched SEACOM, the first fiber-optic cable to provide connectivity between Eastern and Southern Africa, Europe, and Asia. In 2009, SEACOM was awarded Best Pan African Initiative at the AfricaCom Awards Globa Alumina Refinery in Guinea- signatory of the United Nations Global Compact


The company first had to search for suitable land in Cameroon and it relied on applicable and applied scientific data available. It conducted scientific research such as: suitability soil studies, High Conservation Value Forests (HCVF), Implementation Plan, Social Impact Assessment, Flora and Fauna Studies, Environmental Social Impact Assessment, and digital GIS mapping/ 3D mapping. In addition, the company imported technical support by intentional experts of Oil Palm growers to supplement our local expertise. To conclude, SGSOC was established in 2009 with a mandate to provide significant benefits relating to poverty reduction, illness prevention, improve health care and education among other positive impacts. Herakles Farm is committed to promoting local community engagement, environmental protections and corporate social responsibility, biodiversity, setting portions of land aside for the development of food crops, and significant local economic development and empowerment program planning. SGSOC s palm oil project will be self-sustaining and it will include power generation, processing mills, repair facilities, employee housing, schools, medical centers and community development programs. Once Dr. Timti was finished, Mrs. Haman Bako opened the floor to everyone and asked if anyone had any concerns and or inputs regarding the project that should be addressed in the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment. Questions/Concerns and Answers Question 1 (Mrs. Haman Bako): What are your concerns regarding the ESIA study? Question 2 (Mrs. Mbah Regional Delegate of MINFOF): You talked about fauna and flora studies, especially in the area of conservation, I dont know if this has already taken place or still ongoing, if they have taken place since we have no idea what are the outcomes, could you give us an impression and what youre going to do about it? Response (Dr. Timti): Thank you madam, the studies are still on going, some have been completed like the soil studies. When you go to engage in an area, there are areas you cant plant oil palms for one reason or another and we will do an HCV in those areas and convert them to biodiversity units, so the studies are ongoing and some are available and can be consulted. Question 3 (Frank Stenmanns Kfw): We are hearing about the project, but are there any documents that are publicly available to coincide with the information you have provided? Is there a presentation of the order that has taken place? What are the impressions of the ESIA? What is the area of limitation? Is the project going to take place? Response (Dr. Timti): The essence of being here is for the ESIA and we will stay within the limits of this topic. If there is anything to be given out we can discuss it at another time. We are going to operate in Nguti, Toko, and Mundemba, like I said, the studies are ongoing we cant do anything until the studies are completed. Thank you. Question 3 (Chief Dr. Atem of Talangaye from Nguti Subdivision): Would like to know the process you took to select your ESIA consultant. It is important to know companys credential and track record. There should also be a background record we could all take home regarding this project especially as a stakeholder. Besides what you said today, you havent provided us with information like how youre going to handle waste and employment. I would also like to know who my fellow stakeholders are because we are here for different perspectives. Certainly we all have different reasons why we are here. Response: Mrs. Haman Bako asked every participant for a brief introduction. She then presented H&B Consulting and the experts involved, some of the ESIA for similar jobs the company has conducted, and then on the selection process to do the ESIA which was done through an international bid. H & B Consulting USA is responsible for the conduct of the ESIA.


Question 4 (participant): Have you done studies on the population being affected? Response: Yes, a social economic study. Question 5 (participant): Do you have the Terms of Reference (TORs) of that *socioeconomic study? (*Socioeconomic study done by Nature Cameroon) Comment (Chief Dr. Atem): I am not aware of what study was carried out, me being the chief, Im not aware. Thats why Im surprised, so what were the terms of reference you gave to your researcher for the *socioeconomic study. Youre supposed to have given us a document with background information; I will not be bothered now. If I had this document I would have read it before coming here, now I have to rely on what you tell me. Comment (by another participant): I know of another chief who is not aware of this *socioeconomic study. No one knows. What are we commenting on? Response (Dr. Timti): I introduced the company and the project within the limits of the ESIA meeting. Response (Mrs. Haman Bako): We are here to introduce the project and discuss the impacts of the project on the environment and the populations in the project area. Note: Mrs. Haman Bako was interrupted by another participants comments Comment (participant): We are diverting from one thing to another. We started with a brief project presentation then Madam talked about her consulting company and then a series of documents were presented. I want to know what were the terms of reference for the *socioeconomic study, what were those guys working on? I dont want to know how you were selected. Lets answer that and we can move on. Response (Dr. Timti): His terms of reference were to study the villages within the project area, to get their needs. A questionnaire was designed to evaluate the needs of the communities involved. Question 6 (participant): Where is the ESIA report? Response (Dr. Timti): TORs for the *socioeconomic study are in the report. Response (Mrs. Haman Bako): Ok, I just want to clarify something, we not here to present the results of the final report for the ESIA. We are here to get your inputs and concerns regarding the project to improve the ESIA which will eventually be reviewed by the inter-ministerial committee and then presented for public audiences as stipulated by the environmental law. What I need are your concerns of the population youre responsible for. You know your community. During the week we will speak to all the chiefs from the villages. Comment (Mr. Moki Joseph): The project started in Mundemba and Toko. I listened to Dr. Timtis introduction of the project. I believe a lot of documents were provided to the government, my name happens to be in one of them. I hear Dr. Timti talk about Herakles Farms; I believe you wont see SITHE GLOBAL in those documents, now we are talking about Herakles Farms. Thats my first concern. The convention was signed by a VP of Sithe Global, Farnan Carmine, now we have someone from Herakles Farms. Response (Dr. Timti): explained SITHE GLOBAL signed project off to Herakles Farms and SGSOC is the local company and subsidiary of Herakles Farms. There is a legal procedure in changing company names. Comment (participant): I am concerned with all the different names involved with the project. Having difficulties the way the project has been handled. It is like we have been kept in the dark on purpose.


When the studies were done, I was not aware, my village was not aware. At the very least, some summaries about the progress made so far should be made available to key stakeholders. Comment (Mrs. Haman Bako): The law states that when we are done with the ESIA, it will be submitted to MINEP which will then carryout public audiences from which final recommendations will be made on the document before the final copy of the ESIA is published widely. Comment (participant): If we had the TORs, it would have helped us to better contribute, but we do not know. Response (Mrs. Haman Bako): We have a copy of the approved TOR if you want to take a look at it. Comment (Mr. Mambo - GTZ, see scan attached to this minutes): We have a paper we have written with our concerns. We want to highlight the issue of the ESIA, it is expected to bring a result for people that live in the area, however, we have seen projects all over the world that once they get started people realize they been fool. It is important people affected by the project make inform decisions. That is why we need to predict today what the problems will be in 10-20 years from now. GTZ, the German Corporation Intervention has done a lot of work in Cameroon, for example, the establishment of Korup National Park. Weve been working in the area since 1986. Some of the concerns are: 1- Magnitude of Project (80,000ha)? 2- Detailed rate of conversion of land to plantation is not clear 3- Management Plan - Detailed plan for social amenities like roads to avoid that GTZ activities and project are complementary. For example there is no need for GTZ to invest in a road if there is a company coming in that will either destroy the road or build a road, we can put our money to use somewhere else. 4- Over lap of community forest or potential community forest activities with community driven plantation. This area is going to be heavily affected, how is the ESIA will address this problem. For example, there are 5,000 hectares that are overlapping with Mundemba Council forest, what will be done? 5- We did a satellite sensory study to get an idea of how much intact (virgin) forest we have. How much virgin forest is there in this area? We see that 60% of the area is high value forest. 6- We also looked at the villages; there are 20 villages inside the concession and 31 in the peripheral for a total of 51 villages. We hear SGSOC will employ around 12,000 people and perhaps more. There will be an influx of people in the area due to the fact that indigenes from experience have been reluctant to work as laborers. How will this be addressed as some of these people will end up as poachers in the neighboring reserves? What measures is the company putting in place to address this issue? 7- 40% of the concession is occupied by forestry entities. How much land will people have for their use? From all our analysis only about 10,000ha appears to be appropriate for the project. Is it still 10,000 ha or 80,000 ha? 8- An MOU has been signed, it is a good step forward for the communities needs Comment (Mrs. Grace): If we had a clear map, some of the confusion would diminish. Question 9 (Chief Dr. Atem): I can read your mind Dr. Timti. We are the affected people; we want to know how this project is going to affect us. Question 10 (participant): Demarcation, at what time does it start, before you start doing the ESIA? Is there a scientific approach to this? Where is the land conversion going to start?


Response (Dr. Timti): The demarcation cant be done in isolation, it has to be done with the stakeholders and everyone involved. We dont know how much land there really is? There are studies that are still ongoing; we are here for the ESIA concerns. Comments (Dr. Allo): Lets refocus on our debate; let us not say that there is a plan to conceal this project, we are not hiding information from stakeholders. Some of you have not been present when certain teams have come by, for example, when we went to a village in the SGSOC concession, I was not able to speak to the Chief, because he wasnt there. I say all attempts should be made for all hierarchies in all of the communities to be well informed. Other comments by Dr. Allo: Contributions like letting the team know about the villages that have been left out during the *socioeconomic study were good feedback. Explained that studies that have been done by various consultants and the company are still pending to be approved by the government before it is circulated widely. For studies on flora and fauna, recommendation have been made either for some species to be conserved in-situ or ex-situ, depending on their distribution and their protection status according to Cameroon law and international conventions. Other issues to be looked into include drills in the Korup National Park, corridors for elephants, and protection of biodiversity along water courses. Reminded participants there will be other consultations and audiences Give us an opportunity to give your input. Lets not focus on the companys name. What input can you give us for the ESIA? Mr. Mambo there is no way we are going to develop 80,000 hectares, we are not here to discuss what PAMOL or CDC has done, we are here for input on this project, if we can do better then those companies, why not? My advice is that all the villages should be involved in the demarcation of the area. One of the concerns is the number of jobs this project will create. In a short questionnaire administered recently, we found that 85% of the population is between the ages of 20-40 years old and 95% of them want to work. Youths are going to cities to find work and we all know these places dont have work. My advice is that priority should be given to the young people in the area, they want to work, give them work. Comment (Chief Mbile Lipenja-Batanga): I am happy we are here. This project is taking ground; people are suggesting how it can be better. We have CDC and PAMOL and we hope this project will be better than those. We are lucky we have a chance to influence this project, something we didnt have with CDC. However, the company should open several information channels to the public. I was the first person to oppose this project until I was well informed and then I changed my position. I am sure this project will be a success because all concerns are being raised, for example, just because people dont like plantation work, it doesnt mean we cant have incentives. I like statements like changing the mentality of the youths working as laborers in plantations, for example, Mr. Kimbeng started working as a water boy in a plantation and rose to the rank of a General Manager of CDC. In Mundemba and Toko, people are very eager to get this project started. In my village of Lipenja, the youth were happy to have started setting up for the **nursery and some were even cried of happiness to have made 15,000 CFAs in 3 days when they normally only make about 10,000 CFAs in a year. (**Due to the high altitude in Lipenja nursery was not establish there) I say the forest is for white men, not for us, we want development, we want to eat better. Government has accepted all the projects and has signed conventions with project holders and it will be left with the government to decide which project it has to modify or compromise after the studies and reports. This project has already been approved, we are wasting time, lets do it. Comment (Franck Stenmanns - GTZ): I am interested in the companys criteria for demarcation of the land, it should be free of cohesion from any party. I have gone through the RSPO Criteria and this can


be checked on their website and one of criteria concerns the non replacement of primary forest by any kind of development what so ever. My concern is that apart from village land, the primary forest and species of high conservation value (HCV) will be lost. I know that starting in 2005, new plantations cant replace primary forest and nothing can be planted if there is a HCV. Response (Mrs. Haman Bako): Studies on high conservation value forest are ongoing by RSPO expert and MINFOF which will give input on this. Comment (Chief Mbile): That HCV is very bad. Comment (Chief Dr. Atem): I have two points I want to talk about (1) Foreigners, government partners, and HCV: for the last 20-30 years my village has been exploited and we havent seen a dollar. Who are you developing for? I am not against development or conservation, but who is going to get my people out of poverty? Are we animals? When will my people see a swimming pool, a vehicle? I against for conservation, but we should also see human development. (2) SGSOC: Weve had several informal hearings this year and you have never given any handed out any documents. Im going to read concerns stemming from the MOU document: EIA should be done within the best practice; farmlands must be protected; demarcation must be participatory ; technical training of locals by SGSOC ; employment, we want to be managers, we want our people to be educated, and we want scholarships for our children; protection of natural resources and other assets; no pollution of river courses. Addressing to GTZ and government officials: We respect you, but dont force your agenda to the government because your agenda has not pulled us out of poverty. Comment (Chief Mbile): You cant dehumanize people, your protecting apes and timber. We are not enjoying the timber. We are suffering because of primary forest, dont bring those concerns here. Timber forest is doing what for me? You dont know what poverty is! Response (Mrs. Haman Bako): SGSOC will be compelled to follow RSPO guidelines, for example, any virgin or primary forest will not be touched. Comment (Mrs. Mbah - MINFOF): It is our mandate to write to the government of Cameroon and give technical information about issues that will affect the project site and this should not be looked upon as trying to block the project. Comment (participant): This is true because no person would have believed that after more than 30 years of existence, the inhabitants were going to take CDC in court for land issues. Comment (Mr Dibo - Regional Delegate of the Ministry of State Property and Land Tenure): There are two approaches that could be employed in the project: (1) carrying out studies systematically before proposing the execution of an activity or (2) adapting to the activities that will stem from the project since the project has already been accepted by higher authority. We are in a typical situation of adaptation. The pre-defined boundaries do not really exist and so contributions on how the demarcation should be done should be of top priority because when the demarcation will start taking place, some of the participants may not be opportune to be there even though it will be done in a participatory manner. We could make suggestions on how demarcation can be done.


There have been some misgivings about the project; some persons concerned in the project have carried out projects in the region which according to the inhabitants have not worked, they didnt get what they expected, but that a sinner can very often repent from his sins. Saying for example that inhabitants will not be laborers is not strategic at all because people have moved as laborers in a company to General Managers. There is nothing wrong with being a laborer; I was a son of a laborer. Just saying that SGSOC may have to sign some sub-conventions before the project start is not strategic because there are issues like, will the sub-convention affect the main convention? Question 11 (participant): What point in the convention talks about the participation of the community in the demarcation? Because it has not been implemented, we have heard about pillars have been placed on the field. The community and leaders need to be involved. If you dont know the area, where are you doing the ESIA on? We have our own traditional boundaries, we know these boundaries. We suggest that each village has 10 kilometers as a buffer zone. We need to have this information added in our convention. Question 12: What is the lease period of the project and surface? Response (Dr. Timti): Studies are still ongoing to determine the exact surface area to be used. The lease period is for 99 years. Comment (participant): H&B Consulting has made it very clear the reason why we are here. The project is there, the government is committed. My fear is we have not accomplished our goal in this meeting for the ESIA. What do we do now so that our people doesnt come tomorrow and demand things we didnt do today? The Ministry of Forest is here to do their job, GTZ is here to protect forests, SGSOC is here to sell their project. Every stakeholder is here to defend their interest and we wouldnt want to be looked at as poor negotiators. When the chiefs talk, they are speaking from their hearts because they know their people. So we should not over drag and cause the meeting not to move ahead. On the part of the communities involved, a MOU has been drafted and signed by all the traditional authorities, this will serve as a guideline as we move ahead. When the professor spoke, he left one part by the time he finished, he left unanswered questions and I think thats why we are here. We need to revisit those points of demarcation. Is it going to be a process of steps? When do we demarcate and how do we demarcate? How is SGSOC not going to deprive our people from their only livelihood? Who will implement the ESIA recommendations to avoid the kind of situation that CDC and PAMOL for example are facing today? How is SGSOC going to address the poverty of our people? I appreciate the work GTZ has done. Im very active in my community so I know what goes on and you dont go there and tell people not to accept the project. You should be advising us on how to tackle the situation and make proper decisions. We are wasting our time, what we are doing here is damage control. Do we know why people are not interested in working in plantations? Maybe it is because they are under pay or because the incentives are not there. The laborers are poorly paid so lets focus on pay. Lets not make them work like slaves with little money. When AES SONEL came they increased our salary. It is the highest pay company in Cameroon and it has put other companies in difficulties because of that. A director in AES SONEL gets 5 million. The project is just starting. I think we can still influence the way this project will be done. If you have a specific problem in your village, you should say it now. Reading from the MOU: What holds SGSOC to implement this MOU? We should be asking them now. This MOU is a platform to negotiate with, is not a contract. SGSOC, what is the timetable to implement this agreement? That is our concern. Who is going to facilitate this agreement? The logistics? No


agreement is ever perfect, but lets not depends on good faith. So please, I think we should get SGSOC to look at this agreement and tell us the timing of when it will go into effect. Lets avoid guerilla tactics; dont pay a visit when leaders are out. If you are visiting a town or looking for consultations, let them know you are coming ahead of time. Dont provide information when the leader is not there. Comments (Dr. Allo): Ladies and gentlemen, like I said before, we should focus our discussion. Demarcation is not the topic here, we dont know how it will be done, but the powers that be will make sure the local authorities and people are present. I certainly wont be there when the demarcation happens. We are not doing guerilla tactics, I understand we are all busy people. I just happened to be in the area working on a study and took the opportunity to see if I could speak to the chief of the village, thats all. However, the person I spoke with voiced his concern that his people wanted to be managers. Im not speaking for SGSOC, but I told him he should give me a list of his young people with an A-level who would be interested in being trained for managerial work and that it would be presented to the company. This is the time when people should be trained. Now you ask who will implement the ESIA. The ESIA first needs to be approved by the government. The ESIA will provide all the impacts and mitigations and the company will have to implement the ESIA under the supervision of the government which will require them to be monitored or followed up with audits. You have ample opportunity to tell us the interests of your community. Question 13 (participant): How much surface area is SGSOC asking from the government? How long is the lease? What are the direct benefits to the communities? Everything is being directed to the workers. If the ESIA goes directly to the government and not the villages, that doesnt sound correct to me, Im confused. Response (Chief Dr. Atem): Let me try to explain to madam. The MOU is not coming from SGSOC, it was a compromise between the population and SGSOC, and we have made specific demands. When we submitted these specific demands, SGSOC responded and we got an explanation from them why certain things could not be done and we told them this is what we want. For example the issue of employment, there is no way I would let my people not be managers when you have people like Dr. Timti and others being managers. One way to go around that is to educate my people to be managers and thats where SGSOC can provide scholarships to train our people to be managers. This is one example that would benefit the population not just the workers. Comment and Closure (Dr. Allo): When you open a road is not just for the workers, it is for the population. When you build a health clinic is not just for the workers in the plantations, the population benefits as well. The community stands to benefit from these social amenities including, schools, electricity, and water. I would like to thank everyone for being present. Thank you.





Maps from Mrs. Mbah MINFOF






Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SG Sustainable Oils Cameroon LTD Public Consultations NGUTI Subdivision
Date: 28/09/10 Time: 12:10 - 4:30 Place: Nguti Council Hall Attendees: See attendance sheet Meeting started with an introduction of the H & B consulting firm and team by Mrs. Haman Bako. She also explained that due to poor road conditions the meeting could not start on time and that the rest of the team, including Dr. Timti, was still struggling to get to the meeting as they got stuck at a muddy place for over two hours. Mrs. Haman Bako explained the purpose of the meeting was to improve the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) by obtaining their opinion about the project. According to Cameroon law, when conducting an ESIA, a public consultation should be made with the Mayor because he or she is elected by the people and can therefore voice the concerns of the community. Mrs. Haman Bako then opened the floor to the audience. Comments/Questions and Answers: Comment (Mayor): What we have asked for has not been met. What can the chiefs tell you when the MOU has not been respected? Comment (Chief Boka): We have placed certain conditions, but we dont know if they have been accepted or not. All of our concerns have been highlighted in the MOU; we want to know if they have been implemented. Response (Mrs. Haman Bako): So you want to know whether or not the conditions in the MOU have been approved, thats your concern? Response (Chief Boka): Yes. Response (Mrs. Haman Bako): Ok, so we will put that in our ESIA. Comment (participant): So you are saying you are here to discuss the ESIA not the MOU? Response (Mrs. Haman Bako): We have the MOU, but by law we have to come and do a public consultation, we want to make sure you have signed this MOU. Like I said before, I would put your MOU concerns in the report. Note: The meeting was suddenly interrupted by some chiefs that arrived while the meeting was in session. They were not seated in their respective places and didnt feel included in the meeting. Furniture was rearranged to accommodate them. The Chief moderator took over the meeting and expressed how insulted they felt considering the meeting had started late and without their presence. The moderator continued to express how disappointed they were with SGSOC and how things were going the wrong way. He then asked for the H&B Consulting team to introduce themselves and explain their purpose for being there.


Second Attempt to start the meeting Mrs. Haman Bako introduced H&B Consulting once again and excused the team for being late and explained Dr. Timti and the rest of the team were on their way. Response (Mrs. Haman Bako): Our meeting here today is for the public consultations for the ESIA, thats why we have asked you to come today. Cameroonian law states that when we are conducting an ESIA, we have to do a public consultation, we have to talk to the people and if there is anything you want to tell us, let us know. This meeting should normally be with the mayor with no Divisional Officer or party elites so it is just for you to tell us your concerns with no pressure or biases from government officials as they may have their own agendas regarding the project. Note: Mrs. Haman Bako opened the floor to the audience once again, but they were hesitant to speak. The few participants that spoke were concerned about those who were or were not invited to the meeting and the MOU. Mrs. Haman Bako reiterated the reason of the meeting and the importance of voicing their concerns regarding the project. Chief (moderator) called several chiefs and asked to meet outside the room to consult with one another. After a period of consultation amongst themselves and key community members, they came back to the room with the following declarations: (1) They are very reluctant to contribute and participate in the meeting because SGSOC has not been complying with a lot of the terms as spelled out in the MOU signed by all the chiefs of the villages. (2) Issues of protocol like meeting the Divisional Officer to authorize the meeting were raised considering the meeting was planned during a sensitive period in Cameroon (October 1, 2010) which is usually reserved as an important day in the Anglophone provinces in the Republic of Cameroon.. (3) Chief (moderator) emphasized that the meeting be postponed for at least one month to permit them to consult with their subjects in order for them to contribute more positively. Response (Mrs. Haman Bako): Chief can I please have a word with you. Note: Mrs. Haman Bako and Chief (moderator) stepped outside. After speaking briefly, they came back in and an attempt was made to continue the meeting, however, other chiefs ruled in favor of adjourning the meeting and postponing it for a month. Response (Mrs. Haman Bako): I would like for you to look at the letter from the Ministry of Environment and Nature Protection with the dates approved by the Minister for the public consultations (see TORs), it is not strategic to change this date as there are other public consultations to be done and this report needs to be submitted to the Ministry. I am begging you to please wait for the Project Manager of SGSOC, Dr. Timti, who will be arriving shortly; he will be well place to respond to certain issues already being raised including the logistics of this meeting. Note: There were quarrels amongst the group of who was a chief and who wasnt. Twice a comment regarding the amount of money given for the Chiefs meal during the meeting was made. There were also several personal disputes amongst them.


Third attempt to have a meeting When the rest of the team members arrived at the meeting hall, a brief consultation amongst the chiefs and Dr. Timti took place and this gave room for certain explanations and sensitization. Chief Dr. Atem - Talangaye: I would like to apologize for our late arrival. We had all the intentions on starting this meeting at 10:00 but the bad conditions of the roads delayed us. Let me get straight to the point, Mrs. Haman Bako and H&B Consulting is a company carrying out an activity which is required by the law of Cameroon. If there is a project being carried out in the country that may interfere with the environment, an ESIA must be done. H & B Consulting is certified by the government and this public consultation is your opportunity to emphasize some of the issues you have raised regarding the MOU without any fears. It is not my place to sensitize the community about the project, but I am knowledgeable about certain issues regarding this project. They have come out to get from you people what your worries are about the project. They will come again and go from village to village to assess all the impacts of the project and a report will then be sent to the Ministry of Environment and Nature Protection which will in return carry out public hearings to validate the contents of the ESIA reports before final approval. We need to tell them what we like and we dont like about this project. I was there with them yesterday and they got the opinions and concerns from the delegates and now they are here to get ours. We cant adjourn the meeting until one month, this is not possible because the Minister is waiting on this report, and we cant impose on them a timetable. They are aware this meting should be taken place today. Comment (participant): You are telling us to give you our concerns but representatives of SGSOC are here, we dont want to say something that may make SGSOC upset with us. They shouldnt be here. Please, so what Im saying is, if the Chiefs who we have much respect for have made a decision to adjourn the meeting, respect their decision. Comment (participant): Today we have a chance to say what SGSOC is doing and not doing, we have the opportunity to have a separate entity. We are all in agreement for this project to go ahead. This group is here to tell the government what we think, we know the lands overlap, we should tell them the rivers will dry, that once our forests are cut down, it will give us heat. If they are saying theyre going to go to village to village, we should tell them exactly what we want them to do. I want to tell the chiefs I didnt get an invitation, but we are here because we have concerns. I want to believe that this project has more positive than negative impacts. In the future people will say, if I had been there, this would not have happened. The Cameroonian government would not want to hurt their people. Please take your time and speak your mind. Comment (Dr. Allo): I would like to refer to a document that was done by an NGO in Nguti, the *socioeconomic study (*Nature Cameroon), it was well done. Information was taken from all the villages and they mentioned things that they dont have such as schools, water, clinics, and markets, it is an excellent document. This is the opportunity you have to address particular concerns you may have in your villages regarding the project. We want our report to represent your views, your concerns. Comment (Nature Cameroon): With all the respect I have to all your highnesses. When an organization assigns you to a study, the next thing an organization does is to present the report to all the villages. I sent a letter to all the villages involved if you did not receive the letter or you did not see people who came to ask one or two questions, then we will sort that out later because in matters of development you need to be


sure of who did what and when. I want you to know that the socioeconomic study is different from the ESIA. The socioeconomic study is supposed to get back to the community. Do you have anything to add to this report? (addressing to SGSOC) When I sent a draft report to you it is not a final report because a final report comes when the two of us get together and move from one village to the next, that is not what they have done. A socioeconomic study is just a guide with respect to what the community wants, it doesnt give you the negative impacts. But what theyve come here to do does not concern SGSOC, we should follow the protocol, if we are suppose to have a meeting, it should be a meeting between the consultants and the people of Nguti without the influence of SGSOC. I dont see the purpose in going forwards and backwards. We still have to go to the villages and present the socioeconomic study to the villagers. Note: Moderator insisted on adjourning the meeting once again. Comment (Chief Dr. Atem): I will wait for H&B Consulting when they come to my village, but for now I will tell them my fears, you should do the same. Note: Mrs. Haman Bako read the letter of approval of the TORs from the Minister of Environment and Nature Protection in another attempt to explain the ESIA procedure. She was asked to translate it as it was written in French. Question (participant): Why is the letter of approval for the TORs addressed to SGSOC and not H & B Consulting? I am confused about whether H&B Consulting is working for SGSOC or the ministry. Note: Participants were explained how H&B Consulting USA won the bid and the process a company goes through to select consultants to conduct ESIA. Comment (Chief Dr. Atem): From the meeting in Buea and even today, I can see that the major concerns of the communities have been well crafted out in the MOU. If that is the case then I would suggest to report it in the minutes that all of our concerns have been addressed in the MOU; a copy will be forwarded to the minister. Response (Nature Cameroon): No. The MOU is still highly being challenged. Comment (Dr Allo): It is regrettable to see how a few of us have held the group hostage by the powerfulness of our language and not moved forward. I respect all of you chiefs and I know I shouldnt speak loudly in your presence. An MOU signed by the chiefs who represent the people cannot be challenged so easily by a hand full of persons because the chiefs did their consultations with their subjects very well before appending their signatures to it. In the case where there are other concerns which are not being reflected in the MOU, this would be the appropriate forum to discuss that let such issues be recorded in the minutes of the meeting. Make your opinions count in this report. Comment on the MOU (Chief Dr. Atem): I will take the opportunity to read 8-10 points of the MOU that concern the communities, if there are any additions, say it: 1. SGSOC will conduct an ESIA and they should identify all potential impacts on local development. If you have concerns, this is the time to say it now. They dont have to give us answers; they are only taking down our concerns.


2. SGSOC will avoid planting in our existing farmlands, they should be left alone. If we have issues concerning farmland, we should tell them today. 3. If farmlands overlap with SGSOCs project, they will compensate. 4. SGSOC will create buffer zones. 5. SGSOC will do demarcation of land with the local community. We want to know about demarcation; when will it happen, who will do it, and how will it be done? 6. SGSOC will provide technical assistance. 7. Employment, how do we make sure we get the jobs before people from the outside come in? This is a concern. Have you told them your concerns regarding the council forest? Comment (elite-politician): The political bureau leader of Nguti advised that given the pertinence of the meeting, issues of protocol should be followed, for example, the importance of getting approval from the DO who represents the head of state and government should be taken into consideration for future meetings. A compromise can be made so that the meeting can go on. Note: After a heated debate for and against the meeting to proceed, the moderator for the chiefs asked to reconvene with the chiefs and other key members. Comments (Chief moderator): When are the detailed specific agreements in the MOU going to be implemented? Communities are not fully aware of this socioeconomic survey (communities still need to give their inputs) Demarcation of the land has to be very participatory with advice from communities on where to allocate suitable and problem free land for the project. Worried about employment modalities for the company as the place is already full with strangers. We would like to have a detailed calendar of the ESIA process and the implication of the local communities. Would like to have the minutes of the public consultation be sent to them through Chief Atem for cross verification before ESIA report is submitted to the government. Comment (Mrs. Haman Bako): Thank you chiefs for all your patience, we are ready to hear all of your concerns regarding the project, but before we start, I just want to clarify with Nature Cameroon if their socioeconomic document is correct, is it legit, can it be used? Response (Nature Cameroon): No. I have not signed off the document; I sent it as a draft, not a final copy. My organization will be held responsible. I feel like I cant guaranteed that what I presented to him has been reflected there (referring to the copy Mrs. Haman Bako had) with reservation. Dr. Timti is suppose to produce me a copy, but I dont have one as of yet. Im not saying you cant use it, you can use it with reservation. Comment (Dr Timti): Im sorry about the confusion, this was a paid job entrusted to Nature Cameroon. I have an email from Nature Cameroon asking them to deliver a final document which can be printed out with a date and stating it is the final document.


Response (Nature Cameroon): No Dr. Timti, what Im saying is that you should have given me a final copy. Response (Dr. Timti): This is your document, you should have it already, you gave it to me. Response (Nature Cameroon): Ok, fine, but I should have looked at it. Comment (Chief Dr. Atem): Ok, the answer is yes, make use of the document. Comment (Mayor Nguti): We have a council forest; we fear that SGSOC will block it. Comment (participant from Mboka village?): We have been approved for a community forest and we fear it will be destroyed. We also have a shrine and feel trees should not be cut from our water catchments. Comment (Notable from Talangaye): I read through the MOU and the points on social issues in MOU should not be simplified. Buffer zones should be given to communities as farm lands, shrines and water points should be protected, and we want modern infrastructure (roads) and social amenities. Comment (Mungo Ndot village): The compensation amount for land is not clear. We hear of figures between 50,000FCFA and 200,000FCFA. Is this per village or with respect to different surface areas? Comment (participant): The MOU states that demarcation was going to start before any activity is done. Why is the nursery already being carried out when the demarcation has not yet started? Comment (participant): This is the area we live in and we eat bush meat. This project is going to cut trees and the animals will run away, what are we gong to eat? Comment (participant): During the months of October and November we are used to harvesting and eating fish. River Bakube has plenty of fish and if SGSOC invades this area, it will dry the river and there will be no more fish. Comment (participant): I hope the MOU will reinforce compensation measures to avoid history from repeating itself like in the case of the Korup project. Comment (participant): I have no comments until you come to my village. Question (Chief Dr Atem): What is the project going to do to prevent and address health consequences like HIV/AIDS, and other diseases that may be spread by the new comers? SGSOC will be training our children for work, what are the criteria? When do they start training? What can they do now to prepare? Comment (participant): NTFPs which are used for livelihood will disappear. Comment (participant): I have farms of palm oil and cacao, what will SGSOC do about my farmland? Comment (Chief): When you pass Limb, you can see that CDC has planted palms close to the road. We would like for SGSOC to give us 200 meters from the road. Question (participant): Why did the manager of the SGSOC not sign the MOU? Instead he directed his lawyer to do so. Comment and closure (Chief Dr. Atem): We have been invited by the PM for briefings as to why we petitioned the project and why we are withdrawing the petition. On the other hand the government is also concerned that we write back to show that we have withdrawn the petition. Thank you all for coming.






Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SG Sustainable Oils Cameroon LTD Public Consultations MUNDEMBA & TOKO Subdivisions
Date: 30/09/10 Time: 11:00 - 12:30 Place: Mundemba Council Hall Attendees: See attendance sheet The meeting was facilitated by Dr. Andrew Allo, Ph.D., assisted by Chief Mbile of Lipenja 2 - Batanga Village. The agenda can be summarized as follows: (1) Arrival of Participants (2) Singing of the National Anthem and Prayer (3) A word from the Director of SGSOC Dr. Timti (4) A minute of silence for the Fallen Heroes of Mundemba (5) A word of welcome from the Mayors Representative (6) Introduction of H&B Consulting team and Mandate to carry out the ESIA/public consultations by Salamatou Haman Bako (7) Contribution of Participants, discussions (8) Closing. Chief Mbile: Opened with the National Anthem and a prayer and then gave the floor to Dr. Timti, the director of SGSOC. Dr. Timti: Welcome everyone. We are here to focus on you, for you to tell us your concerns about the project, positive and negative. For example, if you have a shrine in your area and you fear the project will bulldoze it, thats a concern. This team will record all of your concerns and propose methods to reduce negative impacts. Dr. Allo: Your Royal Highness, before we start this meeting, I would like for all of you to stand up for a moment of silence for everyone that gave their lives and gave us the opportunity to be here. I remember when I came here in 1988 there was no road and there were about 20 to 30 chiefs that traveled to Garoua to make sure we had Korup National Park, which is here today. You are also making history today by trying to bring development in your community. Note: Moment of silence took place. Mayors representative: Royal Highness, ladies and gentlemen, I stand here on behalf of the mayor of Mundemba, and I welcome you all. I am one of those who are aware of how this project will affect us. I encourage everybody to actively participate. Dr. Allo: At this point I will call the director of H&B Consulting to present the mandate she has and her team.


Mrs. Haman Bako: Introduced her team and explained the specific objectives of the meeting. The meeting is aimed at carrying out a public consultation which is part of the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) for the oil palm project in question. Before we arrived here, we sent the Terms of Reference (TORs) to the Ministry of Environment and Nature Protection (MINEP) to conduct the study. The TORs are here and they were approved this August. In the TORs it states that we have to conduct a public consultation, so we have to come and speak to the population and see what their concerns are. Then we will submit it to the ministry and they will come to you and do public audiences. They will have our report with all of your comments to make sure that what you have asked for is there and have SGSOC implement it. Thats why we are here today. We have already done some studies like the Flora and Fauna and the socioeconomic study which was done by Nature Cameroon, however, we will do our own socioeconomic study and you will have another chance to express your concerns. For example, if there is a shrine you want to preserve or if you want 200 meters of land for future generations to use, you should let us know. Now is the time to take down all of your concerns. We have already identified the potential impacts and we know you already have an MOU signed with SGSOC, we are going to take all the concerns you have stated and include them in our report. If you have other concerns other than the MOU, we will take them now. Thank you very much. Chief Mbile: Chief Mbile started on a personal note and expressed his satisfaction on the progress made so far since the signing of the MOU by the chiefs and continued with the following statements: This meeting is for the ESIA, we need to talk about how this project will affect our forest, our social structure, and what we can say so it doesnt drastically change and so when the final agreement comes, the government can remind SGSOC what they promised. We still dont know the issue of demarcation and what villages are outside or inside the project area. The list has been modified so we need to wait until we know. We want SGSOC to let us know when they will start demarcating so we know whos in and whos out. Land beacons have been planted and has touched farmlands, forest and water catchments; we need a systematic mapping and zoning with the local population to differentiate the land. Also, the project should not build roads that will only serve the company; it should also build access roads outside the greater centers that will exist once this company starts operating. The project will employ 30,000 persons, which is like three times the population of Mundemba, and if we include their families, we could be talking about an influx of 150,000 inhabitants. This will magnify our social structure because our native population will be completely sub-merged. I cant envisage how great the changes will be, things wont be the same. In a certain report we talked about merging villages. We should be conscience of the impacts this project will have. Dr. Allo: I would like to make some corrections. The number of people to be employed is 9,000 and it may be up to 30,000 with the indirect jobs. We keep talking about an influx, but preference will be given to your children prior to other people. The wealth by this project will stay here for development. Also, the merging of villages that the chief recommends, SGSOC does not recommend, in fact, the World Bank


does not recommend it either. If you want to move, that is your personal choice. Please let us hear your concerns. The floor was now widely open to record and document concerns coming from participants: Chief Atanga (Kuma Village): I think you have us in mind, but in our tradition we have foreign villagers who have settled in our land who have been exploiting from our ancestral hospitality. No village builds a shrine for another village. So, if SGSOC plans to bring other villagers, we dont want it, they cant come in. This land goes back to our regional ancestors. Chief Essono Maxwell (Konye, Meme Division) Before Biya took over, before Americans discovered oil, the previous president wept because whenever oil is discovered, there is trouble. The same goes for land. My village is found in block B and we have met project staff doing research several times, but have never been invited to attend any meeting. We are talking about demarcation, but we have never had a meeting. How do you solve this problem? Dr Timti: We are very sorry for this because it is a mistake. It is not only you who saw that error; no person can take a village from another sub-division and put it in Mundemba. The problem is being corrected at the level of the ministry. A team will come around for demarcation and will find out whether it is in our out of the project area. We want to stay in two divisions. Chief Essono Maxwell (Konye, Meme Division): So this map is not valid? Dr Timti: No, it was an error. Concern from Bosso village (a notable): I have inhabitants of 200 and we left the village because of bad roads .We are preparing to go back and settle there. So the issue of enlisting shrines should concern us directly. Dr. Allo: We are not going to discuss demarcation again, farmland is in the MOU. When demarcation comes, you will know, so we can move ahead. Chief Wabane Philip (Fabe Village): Fabe was not initially involved and we were chased out from another meeting, but recently I saw SGSOC come to test the land. We hear this company will develop the area and help us out. We accept SGSOC with certain conditions for example, how does SGSOC intend to catch up with our own benefits that we did not get right from the beginning? Are chiefs going to receive monthly benefits from the project, because money for the Council Forest remains only with the Mayor and does not trickle down to the Chiefs. Intervention from Chief Mbile: Benefits from SGSOC have just been food and transportation for coming to meetings, nothing else. Lets not mix Council Forest and SGSOC because they are different. It is your right to decide where you want to belong. Chiefs have a say and know exactly where they can say it.


Mayors representative: I am ashamed Chief in the manner you have spoken about the Council, if you dont want the Council Forest, write us and let us know, but dont make public announcements like that when people are taking notes. Dr Allo Intervenes: The matter of Community Forest can be settled between the Council and Chief Mbile. Chief X: We the natives have no rights with our forests. It is the government that has the right over all the land. If people want to come and tell us that people who have lived in these lands for thousands of years have no right, I dont want to comment. Chief Mbile: Land ownership issues are very complex and often discussed at higher authority levels and so we can allow this issue to settle. Chief Y: We are very happy to receive SGSOC, but we have some worries for the future. We should be grateful if SGSOC could meet us in our place and tell us the section of the project. I know this project will bring amenities like roads, water, and hospitals, but we also want the company to help us improve our farm work and give us community plantations. Elonge Dennis (of Lipenja II): The team for demarcation should involve the community. Martin (EKoli I): I have never been invited to these meetings, but today I received a call. In Mbonge, the CDC is having land problems with the locals. The demarcation team should go by villages so that certain areas are left for our childrens children. This should be a true story so that some day, no person should quote the chiefs as having taken wine and sold their consciences very cheaply. Dont come and trick us by not building what you promised. Chief Mbile: Those who just started, dont fear, we have covered a lot of land already. We have an MOU, something CDC and PAMOL didnt have; history will not repeat itself with SGSOC. In the Ndian division we have a lot of protected areas like the Mangrove Forest, Korup National Park, and Rumpi Hills Sanctuary. More than 4/5 of our land is protected area and 1/5 is not being used, including the land SGSOC plans to use. Why are people worried about an imbalance when we have all these reserve parks? If a company is coming and it will provide us with development, we should be supporting it. We are fully encouraging SGSOC, am I speaking for all of us? Audience: Yes.


Mayors representative: We are worried about the various overlapping from forest, farmlands and other lands and hope the Government and natives will come to terms on how to solve this issue. The Government is very reluctant to participate in the demarcation, what is SGSOC going to do about this? There must be a guarantee for sufficient land to be allocated by SGSOC for the locals given that 9,000 workers are projected to move here along with their families. This will lead to a scramble for land between natives and workers of SGSOC, how is SGSOC going to address this issue? Dr Timti: I just want to make a correction. These 9,000 people are not coming now, in 2 years, or 3 years. Their employment will take place over a period of 20 years and as time goes on problems will be gradually dealt with. Chief Johnson: During the first meeting in Lipenja Batanga, it was resolved that given that our chiefs are too old to travel, Toko would be the meeting place for the public consultations. It was very risky for chiefs to climb on motor bikes which could have resulted in accidents or the death of a chief on a motor bike. If this happens who will pay for such fatalities? When you want to marry somebodys daughter you go to that person, that person doesnt go to you. Dr. Allo intervenes: We thank God that the ancestors took care of the chiefs and that they will continue to take care of them for a safety return to their various destinations. We apologize for the inconvenience, but we were pressed for time, we would not have been able to hold two meetings today. Inyam Zacharia: I stand to praise the project which has come to strengthen conservation and environmental education in the Korup National Park. This would be possible through absorbing youths who are poachers in the Korup National Park. Alexander Okanba: Im happy to welcome this project. There have been many plantations built all over the world, but I hope this project is not too much in a hurry and risk having problems like we see in countries like Malaysia where people dont have water for their lands. We hope to open our own plantation like what is happening in Ivory Coast. We should avoid conflicts like planning to refuse land that people have already invested in because of SGSOC compensation. Chief Orume Okango B: I thank SGSOC and continue to support the project. This is the first time many of us are in a meeting this is why we have many concerns. You say a team is coming for demarcation, lets not have fear, let it be done in a participatory way. Since the attention is on us, these are our concerns: - We recommend that streams with a lot of fish be given a buffer zone of about 3km so that wildlife could visit these stretches and can lead to some kind of ecotourism. - We also recommend that camps are not too far from the villages so that amenities like schools, electricity, roads, etc., provided by the project can be shared. - Some land should be reserved for future generations.


Chief Mbile: This process is ongoing. The problem of influx of people is normal and the government will support this for the sake of national integration. Locals should start anticipating on training their children for potential jobs and positions, this is a great opportunity. We cant remain natives with a development company next to us. Concerning overlaps, the Council Forest has 2,000ha in Nguti and 5,000ha in Mundemba, but the process of creation is still ongoing and the two projects are on the government table. It is our farmland we should be concerned about, not Council Forest, this forest will benefit who? People want to drag us behind and keep us in the bush. Dr. Allo: This is not the forum to discuss issues regarding the Council Forest. Mayors representative: Thank you for coming, may God bring you back safely. I want to thank the team who has taken every input into consideration. Thank you everyone. Mrs. Haman Bako: I believe the Mayor has said it best, weve taken everything you have said and we will report it back to SGSOC and the Inter Ministerial Committee in Yaound. May God take you back home safely.






Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SG Sustainable Oils Cameroon LTD Meeting with WWF-Carpo Country Program Director
Date: 25/03/2011 Time: 1:00 - 3:00 PM Place: Yaounde main office Attendees: The meeting with Mr. David Hoyle took place on Friday March 25 from about 1-3:00 PM. Meeting started with a brief introduction of the delegation especially Dr. Allo whom David Hoyle saw for the first time. Salamatou Bako of the H & B consulting firm gave a power point presentation punctuated with questions from David Hoyle and answers from the SGSOC team. She as well cited relevant publications and documents consulted to come out with the full SEIA report. She further explained her plans to add a new chapter on the SEIA report on changes or developments that have occurred in the field ie new maps that were recently produced leaving out all community and council forest close to the concession. The SGSOC presentation to WWF aim to show commitment to RSPO principles that encourages responsible oil palm cultivation that conserves both the natural environment and the livelihood of people. Comments/Questions and Answers: Comment David Hoyle: was quite impressed by the number of publications and the information he was apparently receiving for the first time. He made a number of useful comments and insisted on the need to have the communities on board and work more on project PR approach. He asked when the information would be available. We informed him that the project will develop a website. Comment David: The existence of bad roads in the region. Answer Team: All the studies were carried out under very difficult conditions because of bad roads. Answer Dr Allo: Admitted that he has trekked all the bad roads in the Mundemba concession for resettlement programs with Korup project and it was hard to go through. Comment David: Does the out growers scheme include the 9000 people the project will recruit? Answer Salamatou: No


Comment David: repeatedly said RSPO criteria 1 (transparency) is not respected by SGSOC. He has a poor quality map of the concession and is confused with exact locations and overlaps. Comment David: He was interested in seeing Nature Cameroon Socioeconomic report. Answer Dennis: Plans are underway to establish a website for the company to allow access to information to the public. Comment David: Interested to understand elephant movement in the Banyang Mbo Sanctuary and the concession. Answer David Hoyle: admitted for not having seen elephant in the Banyang Mbo Wildlife Sanctuary for the last years he was Manager of WCS project in Nguti. Answer Dr Allo: He has walked the entire region and saw traces but its hards to see them now because of hunting pressure. Answer Dennis: Studies could be carried out on elephant movement in the area. It is possible to engage expert like Mike Lomis of North Carolina University who is currently working in Cameroon on elephant movement. Question Salamatou/Dennis: How do we establish a working relationship with WWF? Answer David: We can work this out in future, but note that the Management of Parks is the responsibility of the government (MINFOF). WWF also works in collaboration with MINFOF. Comment David: Where will the first mill be located? Answer Salamatou/Dennis: Will be in Talangaye where the first nursery has been established. Comment David: raised issues about number of villages in the concession. Answer Salamatou: False villages existing in the concession. Comments David: villages lack portable water and collect water from streams. Answer Dennis: SGSOC will help provide portable water by drilling wells in communities. Comment David: Presence of HCVs in the concession.


Answer Dennis: specifically briefed him of measures intended to be put in place like respecting all HCVs and RSPO principles in the concessions. We intend to demarcate all these biodiversity plots in the field and carry out insitu-conservation program in the concession.

Comment David: Are people in the communities willing to work with SGSOC? Answer Dr. Allo: From the socio-economic studies, people in communities indicated interest to work with SGSOC

Comment David: what about buffers? Answer Team: The law stipulates the leaving of 3 km buffers for parks and SGSOC is going to respect this. Comment David: If primates present in the concession. Answer Dr Allo/Dennis: None was seen during the wildlife study. Maybe because of hunting pressure from communities. They are mostly present in the park. Comment David: What is going to happen to the timber in the concession? Dennis/Salamatou: They might obtain permits from the Ministry of wildlife and Forestry to extract the Timber. RSPO stipulate the use of local material for construction work. We will use this for construction etc. Comment David: When is Carmine visiting Cameroon? Dennis/Dr Allo: He will be coming shortly. Conclusion David: He thinks if he gets the background studies and SEIA carried out by SGSOC, this will help to make it better for planning with SGSOC. He also promised that he will help to sensitize the people of his village Nguti. On the whole it was a positive visit. It dispelled most of the misgivings about the project but is not a substitute for your visit to WWF. Most his doubts are gradually dying out as he saw that SGSOC has a good vision. Notwithstanding, David still thinks we need to work more on RSPO principle 1: transparency. David is also very interested to meet you for a tete a tete discussion maybe just to strengthen this collaboration.


Environmental and Social Impact Assessment SG Sustainable Oils Cameroon LTD Meeting with Government and Non Governmental Organisations, Mundemba, Toko and Nguti representatives.
Date: 28/03/2011 Time: 11:30 - 14:45 PM Venue: Holliday Inn Resort Limbe Attendees: See attendance sheet

The moderator Prof. Allo Gave an excuse for SGSOC MDs absence because of other duties in Yaounde. Open prayer: done by Winnie Eduke Ngalame, C/O Atem Ebako Devt Centre Self Introduction of everyone in attendance followed. Prof. Allo highlights the purpose of the presentation. He emphasized that its a regulatory requirement and a social responsibility on part of SGSOC particularly to have this meeting. Also inputs will facilitate the work of the Ministry of Environment and Nature Protection in evaluating community participation in the implementation of the SGSOC projects. H & B GM, Mme Salamatou HAMAN BAKO gave a presentation of the SEIA report to the audience. She started by introducing the table of contents, Overview of the project promoter Herakles Farms/SGSOC Coffee break 13hrs45 Continuation of presentation at 14hrs05. End of presentation at 14hrs45 Comments/Questions and Answers: Comment participant: Concerns as per the social benefits to be obtained.that not all villages will benefit from SGSOC. Answer Salamatou: A socio economic and needs assessment survey was done and it will help the company decide on the social benefits every village will get in the SGSOC concession area.


Comment Mr. Mambo (GIZ) Buea: objected to H&B presentation assertation that there is available abundant labor in the area. Answer Chief Mbille: Objected that there was abundant labor in his area where of jurisdiction. Answer Chief Atem: as well objected to Mr. Mambos statement and pleaded to all participants to give way to an easy flow of the meeting and contribute positively and objectively. Comment of Chief Makia of Betock backed Mr. Mambos: stand for labor unavailability. This led to some interruption and arguments. Comment Mr. Mbolo: pointed out that the report should be backed with data for all their assertations. Answer Mme Salamatou: stated that H&B has conducted a socio economic study of the area and has consulted other studies and details are found in final reports. Comments Chief Mbille: stated that scholarships be granted to students not just to local universities but foreign as well. Comment Chief Makia: insinuated that SGSOC is not transparent, contrary to one of the RSPO provisions (Transparency), since the report in the ESIA says that Nguti area has only secondary forests.he says Nguti has primary forests. Answer SGSOC/Salamatou: There has been backed by data from the Ministry of Wildlife and Forestry, satellite maps showing progressive logging over the years, international RSPO assessors and Cameroonian experts. Comments Mboka representative: asserted that SGSOC didnt follow procedure because they went through IRAD to get an attestation of the Nguti concession being a secondary forest. Answer Representative Regional Delegate of Environment: No need to waste time on the issue of primary or secondary forests. Cameroon Government experts have given a report and declaration to the effect, and any person or agency thinking otherwise should query with proof to the ministry of forestry challenging that declaration. Comment/appreciation Chief Atem: Impacts of SGSOC activities will last for a very long time. There should be provision by the SGSOC for the transformation of the agricultural economy over years of operation from agro-based to service economy. To him, SGSOC should provide at least 250,000 FRS monthly to each chiefdom to carter for this transformation. He pledged support to any SGSOC measures to realize a careful implementation of the transition and transformation of Talangaye into an


urban settlement. To him it is a pride that demarcation has been completed in Talangaye and the first nursery is located there. Differences and grievances from the people should be presented by representatives from these communities and reactions relayed to the masses when the representatives get back to them. Comment Mr. Agoon Mundemba elite: Concerns about provision for scholarships (Training). SGSOC should not focus on training students from the concession only in universities but also into professional schools. Training assessment should be done in the communities. Secondly, concerning tax exoneration, the trade ministry may not be the appropriate ministry to forward request for exoneration. Comment Mr. Ndonfong (RD MINEPAT) wants SGSOC to carter for the expansion and accommodation of incoming workers and any needs arising from the installations and operations of SGSOC in the concession areas. Also, provisions to be made for recycling residual parts and units of machinery, appliances and outdated, used or unrequired materials so as to avoid congestion, pollution in settlements. Comment Mr. Mambo GIZ: Issue of labor availability and recruitment should be well elaborated. The incoming workers should be planned and provided accommodation by SGSOC. Provisions should be made for a reuse of the nursery site..continuous use for nursery or remediation for agricultural or construction Answer Dennis: If for one reason or the other, an area has been cleared, and the project later on wants to abandon, regeneration activities will be carried out with indigenous and fast growing plant species. Above all, we want to avoid clearing any area as much as possible since we respect the HCVs criteria. Answer Chief Atem: noted that the land is out of SGSOC concession and is a gift from the community. Small businesses should be promoted in the area by SGSOC. EIA intermediary/continuous studies to accommodate for the progress and arising impacts not identified or provided for in the original assessments. All decisions to be participatory. Appreciation Chief Mbile: Appreciated contribution of Mr. Mambo and mitigation measure proposed. Appreciated the fact that the company undertook the initiative to judge and reject the first socio-economic report by Nature Cameroon, and requested the services of an internationally acclaimed ESIA consultancy like H&B consortium. Raised questions as to what extent SGSOC will implement the recommendations of H&B consultancy (ESIA report).


Demarcation should be real and effective. The results should be communicated to the locals. Allocations should be made for expansions in farming and construction to accommodate the new arrivals coming in all aspects.workers in the SGSOC operations as well as business people and service providers in all the domains. Village conflicts should be resolved as much as possible to avoid mistrust and blackmailing. Comment Representative Regional Delegate Environment and Nature protection: Emphasized that his Ministry has been created to address all emerging problems, and all such problems should be directed to the ministry and will be responded to accordingly. He further stressed that, not only huge projects as SGSOC require ESIA, but any installation and operation, personal or industrial operation, and as such no fear should be raised on as per whether or not the Ministry will enforce such follow-ups as the project progresses. Answer Seraphine: SGSOC is not against conservation. Contrarily, SGSOC shall support local conservation programs as much as possible and community livelihoods activities. eg varieties of NTFPs will be initiated to support small scale farmers. That SGSOC as a pioneer RSPO member in the country shall strive as much as possible to respect the guidelines, which in a nutshell address all drawbacks emanating from such operations and mitigation measures. Comment Mboka representative: Demarcation should be done before further development starts, so all communities rest assured of the validity of the process. There has been no feedback or information flow from a recognized SGSOC representative. This lack of information makes the environment hostile and such environment is not good for an investment as such. Answer Mme. Salamatou: Not the entire concession will be developed at once. Development shall be phase out to ensure proper management and mitigation. That way, demarcation per community will have more validity when its done just prior to need. Comment Chief Makia: Measures to mitigate impacts from incoming workers should be put in place. Whether out grower schemes will be expanded on buffer zones. That a committee to monitor the implementation of SGSOC obligations be put in place. Compensations to be given to communities as stated shall not be commensurate to their losses.


Answer Prof. Allo: responded to out-grower scheme questions - that holders of small farms will be supported and promoted with enough land for their expansion. Comment Mr. Asoh Epey (Mboka): Realities in the ground should be respected in the study. Information: there should be communication to the locals as to every step of the operation. That the interface negotiating between local communities and SGSOC failed in the duties, and DELIBERATELY so. (Claimed information is very reliable) That the document concluding that there are no economic trees in Nguti area was false. That negotiation for the land was done between the think-tank clan and SGSOC, and not between SGSOC and the Nguti people. Demarcation - that SGSOC will obtain a lease hold over a particular period. That the locals have no say as to what portions of the land SGSOC occupies or not. That the Bassossi locals are not informed by SGSOC. That the Bassossi locals have rejected the project. Answer Prof. Allo: Let the locals bear in mind that they must first of all receive the company and then tell them what their grievances are. That it helps no one to exercise violence and claim that they are not involved in decision-making. Conerns -Concern about employment opportunities for their people in order to avoid the PAMOL or CDC experience Conclusion Chief Atem: concluded that he was perfectly satisfied with the progress and was willing to offer more land for the project. Conclusion GIZ ( the new GTZ) and some participants expressed their wish to have copies of the studies. They were reminded that procedure does not allow for copies of the studies to be circulated at this time but that they will see them after the reports are submitted to government. They were equally informed that SGSOC plans to develop a project website and the site will eventually carry all project reports.