WWF’s Rainforest Protection Goals Prolong Ecological Decline

PRESS RELEASE
10% Congo Protection is almost no protection at all15% protection of last large intact forest ecosystems, and promotion of continued ancient forest diminishment, are insufficient to maintain Earth's ecosystems, climate, biosphere and human advancement.
This week the Democratic Republic of Congo announced new protections for 10% of their rainforest [ark] , moving towards Brazil's goal of 15% preservation of the Amazon. WWF and other environmental groups hailed 85% industrial destruction and diminishment of the rest of the world's remaining large forest ecosystems as good news. At the UN biodiversity talks in Bonn, WWF organized non-binding national pledges to end deforestation [ark], ignoring biological simplification caused by industrial forestry. WWF promotes first-time ancient primary forest logging [search] which is nearly as bad ecologically as total deforestation. These inadequate responses come as a new study shows ecosystem loss is already costing hundreds of billions [ark] of dollars a year.
EcoInternet is committed — as keystone responses to the climate, biodiversity, water and food crises — to ending all industrial development of the world's remaining primary and natural ecosystems, and committing to strict protection for half of the world's land and sea as global ecological reserves. The remainder will need to be ecologically managed to sustainably meet human needs in perpetuity. This will require massive ecological restoration and protection of forest remnants in over-developed countries, and major new protected areas (increased by 3-5 times) in countries holding the Earth's remaining primary natural habitats.


Dr. Glen Barry, EcoInternet's President, explains “levels of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystem destruction, waste discharges into the atmosphere, and current population and consumption levels — all exceed what can be sustained, much less expanded, and still main a livable Earth. Mainstream and even 'radical' groups such as Greenpeace and Rainforest Action Network are pursuing goals inadequate to sustain the biosphere — further illustrating the failure of the environmental movement to enunciate a sufficient global ecological response. We intend to continue exposing forest liars, ensuring they cause no further harm.”
EcoInternet seeks to identify and implement ecological science based policies required to sustain global ecosystems and equitable opportunities for human advancement. Landscape ecology informs us that at 50% destruction of rainforests and other natural habitats, failure of associated natural patterns of biodiversity and ecosystem processes accelerates rapidly toward collapse. Organizations selling 10% protection and/or “certified” ancient forest logging as forest and climate solutions are a major part of the problem. They legitimize and prolong a dying economic paradigm, pursuing what is easily possible rather than necessary. Without ecology there can be no economy.
“Establishing global ecological reserves over half the Earth's surface is required to achieve global ecological sustainability and ensure our and all species' habitat needs are met. This will be difficult, may take decades to achieve, and will need to be carried out in conjunction with population limits, ending fossil fuel use, and political commitments to equity, justice and peace. But this is the only way humanity will survive. An ecological revolution based upon ecological truths is needed immediately, not politically expedient half-measures.”
As a sufficient global survival plan, EcoInternet renews calls for rich nations to immediately dramatically cut emissions, finance strict rainforest protections, and begin wide-scale ecological restoration and protection at home. Further, national governments and environmentalists are called upon to reject simplistic, status-quo and inadequate responses to the complex interplay of ecological and social crises.
Further, not yet over-developed nations, with large intact habitats, should reject the failed Western development model of fast income at the expense of natural capital, and seek to advance their societies from standing forests and ecologically sustainable use of natural capital. True wealth in coming times of ecological collapse — necessities such as water, soil, local climate and food — will belong primarily to those that choose now to maintain intact ecosystems.

You may also like...

8 Responses

  1. Andre van Tonder says:

    I agree with you 100%. Setting a goal of 15% protection is absolute marketing bullshit. If they were to say it like it is, namely that they are in fact sanctioning 85% corporate exploitation, there would of course be a huge outcry, at least from the environmentalist supporters of these organizations. I get extremely irritated by the complicity of WWF, RAN, etc. in these cases. It is like RAN et al. a couple of years ago hailing as a “victory” that a postage stamp area of the Great Bear forest in Canada
    would be protected, while most of it was in fact given away to commercial interests.
    Regards
    Andre van Tonder

  2. GreenWay says:

    What are your thoughts and solutions regarding the 35 million

  3. Dr. Glen Barry says:

    It is the result of past over-management and climate change, there is no way it can be stopped with industrial logging, unfortunately it must be left to run its course, and after it does the forests will regenerate if left to do so.
    Regards,
    Dr. Glen Barry

  4. Brett says:

    WWF are certainly someones puppet. They suck. Thanks for your great work (yes i made a donation – 🙂

  5. Time for leaders with clarity of human perception, with intellectual integrity and moral courage.
    The evidence of climate change is so abundant and clear but people everywhere are not seeing it and, tberefore, not insisting upon adequate action. But why?
    There are likely other causes for this failure of human perception, intellectual integrity and moral courage, but I would like to ask the Climate Ark community to consider one rather obvious failing. Many too many of the “talking heads” in the mass media are part of this problem, not the solution. These commentators seem to be smart and clever but not intellectually honest; they get paid large sums of money to report news, whatever that is. On the whole, the public appears to think of these opinion-makers as objective commentators and worthy leaders, but they are neither objective nor are they leaders. Please forgive me for saying that many of them behave as professional prostitutes who are paid by wealthy benefactors to say whatsoever is economically expedient, politically convenient and supportive of the status quo for the conspicuously consuming rich and powerful people among us.
    Perhaps we need objective leaders in the mass media as desperately as we require a new kind of leadership in politics.
    Steven Earl Salmony
    AWAREness Campaign on The Human Population, established 2001
    http://sustainabilitysoutheast.org/index.php

  6. As a way of buttressing my viewpoint in the comment just above regarding “professional prostitutes” in the mass media, let me share with Climate Ark community something derived from a person in the ranks of those in the mass media in whom I am so deeply disappointed and regard as highly paid

  7. Michael Major says:

    When you read this excerpt from Glen Barry's message about EcoInternet, you will understand that as environmentalists we have got to start raising environmental expectations instead of congratulating foundation funded engo's for lowering the bar for their globalized corporado friends.
    “WWF and other environmental groups hailed 85% industrial destruction and diminishment of the rest of world's remaining large forest ecosystems as good news.”
    In the international frame, no one is holding the big foundation funded engo's feet to the fire of their environmental promises better than Glen Barry and EcoInternet. Doing this requires co-ordinated grassroots volunteerism and real global citizenship. We want a better environment and we aren't going to get it without building better environmentalism. We don't need industrial friends and corporate donations what we need is higher default expectations for environmentalism and we have got to stop allowing the big corporate engo's to greenwash environmental exploitation.
    If you want to raise the bar on industrial exploitation then you have got to raise the bar on environmental expectations and demands.
    The only way to raise environmental expectations is to put pressure on the big engo's to stop giving exploitation a pass. EcoInternet is doing that by independently raising international environmental expectations for the industrial deals being greenwashed by the big engos.
    You can get involved in this by contacting Glen Barry and participating in the projects and you can help this happen by providing some citizen support in the form of donating $20.00 if you can afford it. EcoInternet makes efficient and effective use of every volunteer minute and dollar that comes to it. But this initiative could be lost for the lack of funding. Please help make it happen.
    Michael Major\
    Victoria, BC

  8. Michael McLaughlin says:

    In light of the massively increasing pressure of US citizens to retain our consumptive lifestyles, I urge you all to never weaken, but increase your work to protect intact ecosystems, help reduce long-distance shipping of goods, and do what you can to influence increased restoration of as much area of earth (and seas) as possible, to a state wherein they are unused for resource extraction.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.