Kampala — THE National Environment Management Authority yesterday broke the silence and voiced its strongest public opposition to the planned giveaway of part of Mabira Forest Reserve.

Nema, the principal environment agency, said the giveaway of 7,100 hectares of forest land to the Sugar Corporation of Uganda Limited, (Scoul) for conversion into a sugar plantation would have adverse environmental effects.

"As Nema we are opposed to the giveaway of Mabira Forest on economical, environmental, social and ecological grounds," Executive Director Henry Aryamanya Mugisha said yesterday. "The issue is the impact of giving away a natural forest for a sugarcane plantation," he added.

Speaking at a monthly news briefing, Dr Aryamanya said the body has been opposed to the giveaway and would maintain the stance. "I have told the same to the President", he said.

The Mabira issue has courted controversy since the planned giveaway hit the public domain.

Groups of environment activists have vowed to use all possible means to block the degazzetting of Mabira. They started out by sending mobile telephone short messages de-campaigning Lugazi sugar. The campaign also went online recently with a petition to save Mabira on a website: savemabira.petitiontime.com.

According to Nema, the removal of Mabira forest would drastically reduce the rainfall and bring about high temperatures in the neighbourhood.

"We have just witnessed the rising temperatures in the country with the few forests that have been cut. This cannot happen again," said Dr Aryamanya.

The giveaway of part of Uganda's largest natural forest now awaits approval of Parliament, the endorsement of the districts of Kayunga and Mukono where the forest is located, the provision of an alternative piece of land for a replacement of the forest and an Environmental Impact Assessment Study (EIAS) to be conducted by Nema.

The environment expert said replication of a national forest in another area is "almost impossible and takes a very long time". "You cannot compare Mabira with Namanve and Butamira forests which only had eucalyptus trees. These forests have different ecological functions."

He said Mabira has not gone yet and he considers the cabinet position as an opinion, "which they had to give anyway."

Cabinet allegedly endorsed the giveaway, although the Prime Minister Apolo Nsibambi has since denied the claims. Dr Aryamanya said even if they conducted the EIAS, it would not change Nema's opinions much.

"We have been involved in the discussion with the government over the giveaway of the forest since last year," he said. He said the documents Nema has seen show that the government intends to give the forest to Scoul, an organization that has so far preferred to remain silent on the matter.

Some activists had already begun accusing Nema of failing to execute its legal mandate to advise the government on environmental matters.

The National Association of Professional Environmentalists (Nape), which is an umbrella organization for the activists, said many government projects had been done without EIAS.

"We have learnt that many development projects have been sanctioned by the government without Nema doing an EIAS," Nape's Executive Director, Frank Muramuzi, told journalists around the same time Nema addressed the media.

This sign of weakness on Nema's side should not be accepted to continue because it puts the country particularly its environment at risk," he said.

EIAS is a study conducted to ascertain the potential effects of a designated development project on the local environment prior to the realisation of a project.

In a briefing at Speke Hotel in Kampala, Mr Muramuzi cited earlier giveaways of Butamira and Namanve Forests, and Buggala which he claimed went without Nema carrying out an EIAS.