On August 7 the container ship MSC Chitra and bulk carrier Khalija III collided just off Mumbai, India. Heavily damaged Khalija III made it to port whereas MSC Chitra was grounded close to the point of collision. In an official bulletin the Mediterranean Shipping Company advised that they held the Khalija III responsible for the accident. In their statement to their customers, who have cargo on board MSC Chitra, MSC advises: ‘It is most important that you notify your cargo insurers that you have cargo on the above ship. If your cargo is damaged, you may have a claim on the cargo insurance. Even if your cargo is sound, you will be asked to provide salvage security and this will normally be provided by your cargo insurer. In any event, you may need to call on your insurance company.’

A couple of months ago Leather International published (April edition page 4) a very significant and welcome observation from Farrukh Hussein Sheikh, one of the directors of the prestigious Mima Leather Group in Pakistan. Farrukh observed in his comments that it was incredible that (Pakistani) tanners were still waiting for freebies from governments and international organisations to buy equipment. He wondered how an industrialist could actually act as and call themselves industrialists when they feel they should depend on handouts from others. That is very interesting and I share Farrukh’s view completely.

It appears that we can talk about ecology all year round and maybe I should stop limeblasting on this subject for a while. However, it is too rewarding to be able to talk about it and land some uppercuts on some prominent chins.
Last month I was made aware of the existence of LWG. Have you ever heard of this acronym? I bet you have not, but you ought to take a look because LWG stands for Leather Working Group and from where I sit they make life in the leather industry difficult rather than making it easier.

What have we done to the world to get into the crossfire with a number of eco-groups? How strong is the ‘ecological’ sales argument to convince the general public to buy ‘green’ rather than greenish. Is price more important than ecology or vice versa? Have any of our representative international associations such as ICT, Cotance or the various national associations ever looked into this? This would be important to know in the light of the proliferation of eco-groups or animal rights groups that actively try to take control of the way the leather industry runs its business.
A press release dated March 23 stated the following (see April page 8 for the full story): ‘To address growing demand for often illegal cattle and leathergoods that are putting pressure on tropical forests in Asia and the Amazon, The Forest Trust (TFT) and the Macintosh Retail Group announced the launch of a new initiative today that will use production of ‘green’ shoes, bedding, flooring and textiles to fight slash-and-burn cattle ranching and production of toxic glues that are decimating rain forests and damaging the environment.

Ecology has become an extremely important topic in today’s society. Personally, I do not think that the general public is very much concerned with ecology, but is pushed towards it by pressure groups both consciously and unconsciously. For some manufacturers or retailers, ecology is a form of publicity in terms of ‘we are green, so all green come and buy from us’. Without those pressure groups, whether institutional or private, we would live in a horribly polluted environment as we still see in some parts of the developing world.
We have experience from the Chernobyl nuclear power station disaster that pollution is not a locally containable occurrence, but a global event. Therefore if tanneries do not pollute in Europe, and if their production is relocated elsewhere where pollution laws are non-existent, or where they are not implemented, then global ecology has gained nothing. The pollution has in that case just been relocated together with the production but returns to Europe through the air and by sea.

It has been a couple of years, that I have been saying that the international organisations that are supposed to represent our trade are doing little or nothing. That is not only my opinion, but many share this view, although few say so, but most show their disappointment by withdrawing from associations or withholding contributions to associations. If I remember well I mentioned the good-old-boys clubs which are convening once in a while to discuss matters of interest in one of my columns a couple of years ago.

I hope that everybody enjoyed the Christmas and New Year celebrations. My very best wishes to the readers of Leather International for 2010 which we all hope will make us forget the problems encountered in 2009, which at least in terms of optimism and economy ended better than it started. Let’s be confident and say that we are on the right track. Sole leather tanners who had a very tough time for the past two years have at long last received some orders. At least it helps them to clear stocks. The underlying factor is that obviously shoe factories have orders too. Will it last? The Dubai bubble burst showing that you do not have a healthy economy counting on luxury and real estate without an industry, but luckily it has effected the world economy only marginally, so far.

In Greece, on Tuesday May 5, 2009, at noon, ‘me the below expert bound by oath and assigned by the Chairman of the Chamber of ‘Town’, with his document attended today to operate and expert report on behalf of the Chamber.
‘The expert report was enquired by the ‘buyer’ to examine the lot of leathers that the applicant firm received from ‘the sellers’, a firm whose registered office is at ‘Country’ of Africa. The applicant firm claims that the products that she received are different from those ordered, and in particular they had suffered from scraping of machine.

As in many cities around the world, the Syrian tanners of Damascus operate in very old and inefficient tanneries within the city limits, growing literally out of the seams of their pants. Working conditions are extremely difficult and completely lack a minimum of efficiency. The tanners have been ordered to move to a new industrial area called Adra. Contrarily to what happens elsewhere, where people talk for years and years and do nothing, the Syrian tanners have started packing their bags and are actually preparing to move.

While writing this month’s article I had a very interesting dialogue with one of Greenpeace’s public relations people. From this (edited) dialogue you can see that the perception of environmental organisations is set against the leather industry without actually knowing anything about our industry. That is not their fault. It’s our own fault because we have not been able to convey the real nature of our industry. Our professional organisations, which I have criticised on more than one occasion, are not properly representing us. We must get rid of the label that animals are killed for their hides, and that we pollute in the transformation process. Greenpeace added to this our responsibility as accessories to the destruction of the Amazon rainforest. How long will it take before people are objectively informed that we are a solution to an insurmountable problem, namely the transformation of a by-product that would be a health hazard worldwide if there were no hide and skin trade or leather industry.

I am not a tree hugger and I have not one single good word for PETA, therefore I suppose that the title of this Limeblast ‘Greenpeace’ surprises you. I read in this magazine (July page 6) and a daily newspaper about this report that Greenpeace have published about the Amazon and its relation with the meat and leather industry in Brazil. You can find this article on the web at http://www.greenpeace. org/international/press/reports/slaughtering- the-amazon and it presents very interesting reading about matters that we have little or no knowledge about. Reading the Greenpeace article, of which you find bits and pieces woven into my text, I believe that any code of conduct should include also the refusal to buy hides and skins from those companies that profit from the destruction of the Amazon rainforest.

Some things sound so easy when they are discussed theoretically, but when it comes to their execution complications pile up.

Meet In Africa is supposed to be held once every two years and the 2006 AFLAI General Assembly in Cairo decided that the next, the 6th, edition was to be held in Sudan. Limeblast readers have been informed over the last twelve months about this fair and its problems. The mood whether the Sudanese were actually able to organise this fair went from pessimistic to optimistic and back to pessimistic over the last few months. In the end optimism prevailed and the fair was indeed held from May 4-7 and not without problems.

By now everybody will know that we have a worldwide economical and financial crisis and the leather industry is no better off than any other industry, or maybe even worse. The APLF fair in Hong Kong seems to have given indications that the worst may be over. However, depressed raw material prices continue, despite this many suppliers are not lowering their prices while buyers seem to be standing on the sidelines ready to commit themselves as soon as they see orders materialising.
The competitive edge at this moment is not only price, as consumers are not buying leather articles because they are cheap. Nor have they been waiting just to pick-up cheap leather products in a downturn.

When writing this, we are two months away from Meet In Africa 2008 which is scheduled to be held in Khartoum, Sudan, November 15-18, after being rescheduled twice. I don't know about you but I haven't heard anything about this fair which should in principle be ‘the' African event and represent the whole African leather trade.

First an East African update. In early August Burundi introduced an overnight export ban on raw hides and skins with the provision that anyone who builds a tannery will get an export license. The Burundi Ministry of Industry guaranteed only one year ago that it would not repeat the same Rwandan mistake! So much for promises and verbal guarantees but East African countries are notorious for that and recognised as less than reliable up to the inner circles of the EU in Brussels. So in Burundi we now have the same situation as in Rwanda, for exactly the same reasons. The tannery in Burundi was formerly owned by a European company and could theoretically transform all domestic raw hides and skins. It was forced to close in the 1990s due to lack of raw materials. Hence this export ban could secure supplies for the tannery if able to process the available supply. However, like in Rwanda, the local tannery is (as yet) not capable of transforming the available quantity of raw hides and skins. Hence smugglers will have a great time. The sector strategy of these countries makes one wonder where they get their advice from and how much money changes hands in order to get these strategies approved? 

Will Meet in Africa 2008, which seems to have been scheduled from November 14-18, really be held in Khartoum? Will people attend this fair after the world crime tribunal has expressed serious reservations about Sudan’s president? And how far will and can international organizations support and promote this event in a country that has officially been branded as violating human rights? Will it be safe to visit considering that the UN has pulled out its non essential personnel?  

That's French for a mixture of vegetable food leftovers put in a pot and cooked for the next day. And that is what this Limeblast will be, a mixture of leftovers, inspired by articles presented by others.

The first reaction when you hear the word ‘Afghanistan' is horror, war, death, Taliban, Bin Laden, suicide bombers, etc. So when you get an invitation to visit the country, your mind is made up before the word Afghanistan is completely pronounced. No way!

January/February Limeblast focused on the All African Leather Fair held in Addis Ababa in January and wondered whether it was suitable to also organise the Meet in Africa event to be held in Khartoum from November 1-3. Let's take matters in an organised way and start with Addis Ababa.

Let me start by quoting an email received by Leather from a Middle Eastern country which shows how easy it is for people to access the international trade platform and how difficult it is at the same time for them to trade:

Last month I wrote about the growing importance of fair trade, along with humanitarian concerns and consideration for the environment. Fortunately these issues will not go away although they are bound to suffer from various setbacks. In the wake of controversy surrounding animal abuse at Hallmark/Westland Meat Packing Co, the Animal Welfare Institute has released a report analysing humane slaughter enforcement at US meat processing plants over a five-year period from 2002 through to 2007.

For some years I have been waging some sort of war against misused money in the development world in the hide, skins and leather trade. From reactions received it is clear that our trade acknowledges my Limeblasting as right but when you look at what is being done about it, the results are very disappointing.

Last month I gave you a condensed report of some points that had been on the table in Gramado, Brazil at the Unido Leather and Leather Products Industrial Panel. This month I promised we'd take a look at what has been proposed for a number of countries in Africa aiming to end all the misery on which so many papers have reported over the last decades.

Although the announcement was expected earlier,last September ELIA,the Ethiopian Leather Industries Association,announced that it will organise and host the All African Leather Fair in Addis Ababa from January 24-26, 2008,to be held in the huge brand new Millennium Addis Ababa Convention Centre close to the airport.

Kenya and Uganda have recently doubled their export duty on raw hides and skins and are presumably contemplating the introduction of an export duty on wet-blue in order to boost the value addition to their leather industry. Although tariffs are against everything that 'free trade' stands for I must admit that in certain cases tariffs are justified. Some countries need to protect themselves from being deprived of their natural resources.

This is Limeblast 100 and as things were looking in January I intended this to be the last and finish the series on the occasion of this anniversary with: 'and my name is...' In January it was the very first time in almost ten years of a wonderful relationship with my dearest and platonically beloved editor, that we had a serious difference of opinion which made me resign. We tripped over a pair of shoes as habitual readers of Limeblast can easily imagine.

Of course I am not beyond criticism and I invite readers to write and correct me where I am wrong or encourage me where I am presumed right. I would greatly welcome new ideas for Limeblasts.

Our bread and butter is the raw hide and skin and a number of factors influence their value. Except for a few people, everybody knows that the hide is a byproduct of the meat industry in more than 90% of cases.

Professional lobbies and associations are of extreme importance and I had some interesting conversations with the late Tony Mossop when he was president of the International Council of Tanners, an organisation we haven't heard much of in recent years. Anyway that is not what I want to write about. Let's go back to Africa, continent of unimaginable possibilities, if only it gets a fair chance. Instead it is ripped off on each and every occasion and mainly by a few of its own citizens.

Last year July's issue talked about the Chinese taking a serious interest in the African tanning industry.

That's the word Ron Sauer used in his letter to me published in the August/September issue reacting to the June Limeblast: 'More wasted Money'. His letter practically confirms all I have been saying over the years. And he knows! Worst of all his letter confirms that the money wasting organisations and the project factories shrug their shoulders and consider themselves untouchable. Nice title for a next Limeblast 'The Untouchables'.

Just as reported last year, the trend selection area itself was decidedly unimaginative in terms of presentation and layout. However, the exhibits displayed within made up for this. Dull grey walls and display units provided the backdrop for three ranges: Peace - pale and subdued shades from cream through to toffee brown: Passion - reds and red shades of brown plus a bit of black: and Life - pale and warm shades of brown with a hint of green. Next year's black is clearly brown! Emphasis was definitely on the natural: soft and aniline textures.

Although I firmly believe in globalisation and modernisation, until a short while ago I have always considered tannery automation something for the big industry in highly industrialised countries, for top quality products. I thought that automation was an expensive, sophisticated and difficult to use toy, impossible to run and maintain in developing countries. Looking a little bit further, I must admit that this position is rather short-sighted, and I have changed my opinion.

In October 2003 Unido Vienna promoted, sponsored and financed the construction and installation of an SFF at the Addis Ababa Abattoir in collaboration with the Ethiopian Tanners Association. Although little time was available for training and experimentation the installation was objectively a success. Such a success that the ETA organised a (Unido sponsored and financed) well attended workshop, and the abattoir in question, after seeing the SFF work for bovines, wanted to develop a baby SFF for sheep and goat on the spot.

After Western industrialists decided to abandon their homelands and seek their fortune in China to produce more volume and more cheaply and to supply the expanding consumer market, we are feeling the pinch in Western economies. We don't really have an efficient remedy, whereas China's economy is booming with double digit growth this year as it has during the past several years.

Last year I wrote a trilogy concerning the waste of money on development projects in the hide and skin trade that have no result other than creating and maintaining highly paid jobs. Several knowledgeable and highly reputed readers commented in my favour in an article in the November issue of Leather International. It is very difficult to get information about projects because when I write and ask for information people immediately go on the defensive. Smile! Evaluation reports are not made public.

In 2001, I had an idea to set up a trade website. The matter was discussed with ITC in Geneva, who liked the idea. Although ITC and myself agreed on the basic contents, we did not agree on the technical form this website should have. It practically came down to the fact that my approach was not using the latest in web publishing techniques, whereas the responsible person at ITC demanded this. As it turns out he was right and the result is a superb website, Leatherline, that allows surfers to access a variety of services.

First of all I'd like to wish all readers of Leather International and the readers of Limeblast a happy, healthy and prosperous 2006.

I am very well aware that Limeblast concentrates very much, maybe too much, on Africa and on development aid in our industry to Africa. Readers have observed that they appreciate reading about this but would like to have the same dirt dished out from other regions as well.