strategies for the sustainable use and management of timber tree ...

Family Species (& Range States) Workshop comments
12 OLACACEAE Strombosia javanica
(ID, MY, TH, other)
13 RUTACEAE Merrillia caloxylon
(ID, MY, TH, other)
14 SAPOTACEAE Palaquium bataanense
(PH)
15 STERCULIACEAE Scaphium longiflorum
(ID, MY)
S. javanica was reported to be rare in Thailand, but not listed in the country’s Red Data
Book.
In Indonesia, the species was reported to occur mostly in lowland forests in Java and
Sumatra, and to be listed in the country’s Red List. Described as a big tree with good
wood and very hard timber, this species is reportedly smuggled out from Indonesia
into Malaysia, although no specific trade information was available (Setyawati, 2007).
Considered to be very rare in Sarawak (Julaihi, 2007). No information on trade in the
species was available from Malaysia (Chua, 2007).
M. caloxylon was reported to be rare in Thailand, yet not in the country’s Red Data
Book (TH participants, 2007).
No information on the species’ conservation status was available from Indonesia. It
was reported to be used locally in the country, but not recorded as in international
trade (ID participants, 2007).
Contrary to information on the background document, the species is not extinct in
Malaysia, although it was considered to be quite rare in the country, and no records of
trade were reported (Chua, 2007). It was reported to be rare in Sabah, where the
species was known to occur in only one locality in the east coast. Reportedly used
locally in Sabah, but not in international trade (Sugau, 2007).
P. bataanense was supposed to be common in primary forests of the Philippines. The
species is not in the country’s Red List and no records of international trade were
reported from the country.
Further clarification was considered to be needed for this species, and it was suggested
that UNEP-WCMC and the Philippines double-check on which list it should be
included.
S. longiflorum was reported to be relatively uncommon in Malaysia. It was suggested
that the trade figures presented in the background document for this species possibly
refer to Macropodium instead, as S. longiflorum was not considered to be in trade (MY
64