Amazon Deforestation Set to Soar

Amazon deforestation set to soarReacting to increasing Amazonian deforestation in recent months, Brazil has banned the sale of farm products from illegally deforested ares in the Amazon [ark | moreark]. It should be noted deforestation rates [search] do not include rainforest diminishment caused by industrial first time logging and other activities that may leave some trees, but effectively destroy ancient rainforest ecosystems and release much of their carbon.

Policies announced included imposing fines for buying or trading illegally produced beef and soy, sending in seven hundred more troops, and establishing a land registry. The Brazilian government has recently been trumpeting 50% reductions in deforestation over the past two years. However, these decreases appear to have been more a result of declines in agricultural markets than any fundamental reduction in deforestation, and as markets recover deforestation and climate change soars.

You may also like...

9 Responses

  1. If we keep overpopulating Earth; if we keep conspicuously overconsuming limited resources; and if we keep endlessly expanding big-business activities, thereby polluting the relatively small, evidently finite, noticeably frangible planet as we keep doing now, then a good enough future for our children cannot be assured, can it?
    I can understand the wish to ignore human overpopulation as a ominous, huge global challenge; however, to obstinately deny the potentially pernicious, human-driven problems posed by the proverbial ” mother ” of all the looming global challenges, visible even now on the far horizon in the form of skyrocketing absolute global human population numbers projected to reach 9+ billion people within the lifetime of my not-so-great generation's children, appears to render a selfish disservice, one that avoids the difficult work of widely sharing in a timely fashion an adequate understanding of our distinctly human-induced predicament.
    Humanity cannot begin formulating a plan of action to address the human predicament without a consensually-validated understanding of what the predicament is, I suppose.
    The multifaceted predicament before us appears to made even more demanding because the necessary time for confronting and overcoming the global challenges appears short ………. and not to be on our side.

  2. Dr. Glen Barry says:

    Steve,
    We very much appreciate your involvement in commenting on this blog. And it would be appreciated if your try to be less repetitive in saying the same things over and over re: over-population, share some insight into what to do about the population issue, and try to tailor your comments to at times refer to the post being commented upon. It would be good to try to draw others out into a converstation as well. Thank you for your participation and it is hoped you take these suggestions in the welcoming spirit they are intended.
    Regards,
    Dr. Glen Barry

  3. Dear Glen,
    Thanks for the heads-up. If only my feeble communication skills were better, then I would have been able to end the AWAREness Campaign on The Human Population years ago. We have entered the eighth year of this Campaign and much too little forward movement has been made.
    That as it may be, I appreciate the great work you are doing and expect to make more appropriate comments going forward. With that in mind, let me offer a question for your and others consideration.
    Glen, is it possible that OUR contrived logic, linear thinking, material obsessiveness and mechanistic world view, that we see pervading the predominant culture on Earth in OUR time, could result in the children following OUR EXAMPLE and recklessly charging down a “primrose path” to be confronted by a colossal ecologic or economic wreckage, the likes of which only Ozymandias has seen?
    Steven Earl Salmony
    AWAREness Campaign on The Human Population
    http://sustainabilitysoutheast.org/

  4. Dr. Glen Barry says:

    It is not only possible, but probable — heck, even inevitable.

  5. Dear Glen,
    I agree with “possible” and “probable”; however, I strongly disagree with “inevitable.”
    We can do better by thinking anew and doing things differently; and I trust we will choose to do so.
    For example, Al Gore is calling for individuals to employ a strategy of Thoreau, Gandhi and MLKjr called “civil disobedience” as a means of helping us change course. Such action would have to occur collectively to produce favorable outcomes. It seems to me we can begin by sharing an understanding of the predicament we could soon face and then determine collectively how to humanely and responsibly go forward.
    Please anticipate that I will have much more to say about how we could choose to more ably, ethically and adequately respond to the formidable, human-induced predicament which looms ominously before humanity, even now dimly visible in the offing.
    Always, with thanks,
    Steve

  6. Alan Hill says:

    Why is it that we as a species have not evolved into the next level of being,as discussed by many philosphers. Is it due to the damage we have allready done to the Earth. If so our current evolutionary position is on par with the first of our species “Homosapien” some time in our distant past.To follow that thought to its inevitable conclusion means we will make the same stupid mistakes over and over. Till we cease to be a species and take numerous other species with us. Cheery thought isn't it.

  7. Max Stark says:

    As this first decade of the 21st Century slips past with negligible progress in all the vital areas for the combat of Climate Change, I am well down the path of thinking that the end result is indeed inevitable. Gaia has to help herself if we cannot achieve the unanimity and the speed to help her, and to help herself is to eliminate the cause of her problems. Humanity.

  8. Humanity is in danger of losing the exquisite value in one of God's great gifts: the carefully and skillfully developed science on climate change and global warming.
    Is it possible that the standard for determining what is real and true in our culture today is this: whatsoever is widely shared, consensually validated and judged to be ecomonically expedient, politically convenient, socially agreeable and religiously tolerated is true and real?
    At least to me, it seems that good science is being ignored, distractions presented ubiquitously, controversy literally manufactured, or else silence allowed to prevail when reasonable and sensible scientific evidence comes into conflict with what culture prescribes as real and true. Perhaps science does present culture with evidence of inconvenient truths.
    Despite our best efforts, could it be that my not-so-great generation of elders is communicating with one another and our children as if we are living in a modern day Tower of Babel? Is our noticeable failure to communicate reasonably and sensibly about whatsoever is somehow real, and to widely share adequate understandings regarding both how the family of humanity "fits" within the natural order of living things and what are the limitations of the planet we inhabit, in evidence here and now?
    It appears that the human community is indeed in a serious multifaceted predicament, but only in part because of the objective biological and physical circumstances defining our distinctly human-driven predicament. The global challenges in the offing are further complicated by our failure to communicate effectively about the potentially pernicious results that could be derived from having recklessly grown a soon to become patently unsustainable, colossal global economy, one which we have artificially designed, conveniently constructed, and relentlessly expanded without enough conscious, intelligent regard for the practical requirements of biophysical reality.
    Could it be that the current gigantic scale and unchecked growth rate of the global economy is unsustainably driving increases both in adamant per human over-consumption and skyrocketing human population numbers toward the point in human history when the willful, rampant, unregulated growth of consumption, production and propagation activities of the human species precipitates the collapse of Earth's ecology, even in these early years of Century XXI?
    Your consideration is appreciated; your comments are welcome.

  9. Rowan Johnson says:

    on the subject of over population though i do not deny the explanatory weight of a malthusian crush, Human populations are far more vulnerable then they appear. in the coming economic break down, human populations will be devastated through starvation, resource wars and revolution. With a breakdown of central medical care epidemics will more then decimate areas. those who can survive will have have a deep knowledge of nature for otherwise they would have perished. i intend to have many children so that i may teach them how to survive and nourish the earth.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.